IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Mops] Low latency protocol comparision

Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com> Tue, 28 July 2020 19:57 UTC

Return-Path: <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>
X-Original-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: mops@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 941363A0C6B for <mops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:57:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=thinkingcat.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BwM9Uy0JXQZH for <mops@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:57:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from guinea.birch.relay.mailchannels.net (guinea.birch.relay.mailchannels.net [23.83.209.79]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D45BE3A0C11 for <mops@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:57:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com
Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7BB79200A1; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:57:22 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (100-96-5-126.trex.outbound.svc.cluster.local [100.96.5.126]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id CE3E39213E1; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:57:21 +0000 (UTC)
X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384) by 0.0.0.0:2500 (trex/5.18.8); Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:57:22 +0000
X-MC-Relay: Neutral
X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|ldaigle@thinkingcat.com
X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost
X-Soft-Ruddy: 31b415763eeca7ab_1595966242484_2078593452
X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1595966242484:3800645181
X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1595966242484
Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87A60B3479; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:57:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=thinkingcat.com; h=from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=thinkingcat.com; bh=3 4N9AqWcwY+Pm9JYg4NmfLW8Sw0=; b=EnRV2a97o1fYVAmefSjJFOpXYnVA3ahvt 1YYY/CExjIWWnESnYGvsqq4sYOIJ/8JkTVBPFWo3CefUltFOTiCzHNQUjb648icx TU7GyoOBgdW1aky5PyelQyu9A4zgGUXLDOezNTGYFSMhKBIPWZMG/Ms3LoCg3YA5 ddq7dqCZbY=
Received: from [169.254.52.210] (vtelinet-216-66-102-83.vermontel.net [216.66.102.83]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ldaigle@thinkingcat.com) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a77.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 52945B3569; Tue, 28 Jul 2020 12:57:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-DH-BACKEND: pdx1-sub0-mail-a77
From: Leslie Daigle <ldaigle@thinkingcat.com>
To: Ross Finlayson <finlayson@live555.com>
Cc: mops@ietf.org
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 15:57:00 -0400
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.13.1r5671)
Message-ID: <7095E780-A7E2-4D15-BA0E-7ED7822B2431@thinkingcat.com>
In-Reply-To: <73DC917C-835C-4F98-8FB0-4968BE58F486@live555.com>
References: <CAHgZEq4iQx0Un2N_rSOPafDCqzWxO_y_dX3JzZ=nw3=hbhinRQ@mail.gmail.com> <17635DFD-B536-4B22-8A5D-314BCBEFF19C@nbcuni.com> <CAHgZEq738OMiXwsuDuz22zR2tsF+hX8gUNgFsq1262F9rYJcvg@mail.gmail.com> <7D14F27F-5914-46EC-9E27-9A61D3CEF820@haivision.com> <CAHgZEq7W6eXNvD246veeDZVODh123o+q=rghXtPauXWOf+jzLw@mail.gmail.com> <CF90C2E6-3FB0-4FDC-B46E-B4688B5423B0@thinkingcat.com> <CAJU8_nXEv=ezu=25oCs_=rCKyHpJuDk2cFFLCb7m_X0=G8oKng@mail.gmail.com> <QB1PR01MB3826C7AB8B98C00C3938B68BB2730@QB1PR01MB3826.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> <73DC917C-835C-4F98-8FB0-4968BE58F486@live555.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_A86F0949-1DBD-4532-A4FA-B6ED35EB294E_="
X-VR-OUT-STATUS: OK
X-VR-OUT-SCORE: -100
X-VR-OUT-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedriedvgddugeduucetufdoteggodetrfdotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuggftfghnshhusghstghrihgsvgdpffftgfetoffjqffuvfenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvufffoffkjghfgggtgfesrgekmherredtjeenucfhrhhomhepfdfnvghslhhivgcuffgrihhglhgvfdcuoehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedtuddtkeetjedtudduheelfeekgfdugffggedugeetgfefffefiedtffekieelgeenucffohhmrghinhepfihikhhiphgvughirgdrohhrghdplhhivhgvheehhedrtghomhdpihgvthhfrdhorhhgnecukfhppedvudeirdeiiedruddtvddrkeefnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmohguvgepshhmthhppdhhvghloheplgduieelrddvheegrdehvddrvddutdgnpdhinhgvthepvdduiedrieeirddutddvrdekfedprhgvthhurhhnqdhprghthhepfdfnvghslhhivgcuffgrihhglhgvfdcuoehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmqedpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhmpdhnrhgtphhtthhopehluggrihhglhgvsehthhhinhhkihhnghgtrghtrdgtohhm
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/mops/s2pniwcMAhTGLIQTN1S5RU86GXI>
Subject: Re: [Mops] Low latency protocol comparision
X-BeenThere: mops@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Media OPerationS <mops.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/mops>, <mailto:mops-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/mops/>
List-Post: <mailto:mops@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:mops-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops>, <mailto:mops-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2020 19:57:33 -0000

The focus of discussion stems from a comparison of low-latency 
protocols; since that comparison was deemed inadequate, the question is 
whether we can set up a better comparison framework and testing at a 
hackathon.

At which point I’d say we could/should test any interested protocol.

At no point is this discussion (or this WG) about which protocols should 
be standardized by the IETF.


Leslie.

On 28 Jul 2020, at 15:02, Ross Finlayson wrote:

> According to this Wikipedia page
> 	https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliable_Internet_Stream_Transport
> there’s another protocol - “RIST” - that’s "intended as a more 
> reliable successor to Secure Reliable Transport, and as an open 
> alternative to proprietary commercial options…”
>
> If that’s the case, shouldn’t the IETF be focused on 
> documenting/standardizing *this* protocol, rather than SRT?
> 	
>
> Ross Finlayson
> Live Networks, Inc.
> http://www.live555.com/
>
> -- 
> Mops mailing list
> Mops@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/mops

-- 

-------------------------------------------------------------------
Leslie Daigle
Principal, ThinkingCat Enterprises
ldaigle@thinkingcat.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email