Re: [payload] WGLC on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02
"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Wed, 26 December 2012 12:45 UTC
Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: payload@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: payload@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1690721F843E for <payload@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 04:45:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.298
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.298 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, J_CHICKENPOX_46=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m11NOVSNl3jz for <payload@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 04:45:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ee0-f43.google.com (mail-ee0-f43.google.com [74.125.83.43]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 15C0921F84FC for <payload@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 04:44:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ee0-f43.google.com with SMTP id e49so4314668eek.2 for <payload@ietf.org>; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 04:44:59 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-mailer:thread-index :content-language; bh=JVLQkg3D8SZHMzYlx5/zVAskaN4JgGGbmgTSNcrdJJY=; b=ppJ1DJeFieejhl7o7CJ3f04xtTG9pzV6mUAA6/Hdz7J8JYG2b6vQtjnq4cd2lp0xmi t433AtjukCPdGeh3si1BGFH30cq10a6V6LdiqBgfbofdEAAHjhwkuWH/+ePq0P5ioMOI wzTYYyAcwJu5KT4RxSrV33k9EYl78v8F3qD+F2a8NAr/T5i31lKJfYc5fPYUqL9vJr+y 7FswbHVKRGm0BmjhyUNlXI3SvFmbDcbNeRdKnieXOWL0o6dCLNWY3DcNHVV//TY4JxTo Ge1tAJn7Edl30NfKI9LhQb6tvsRmzWSr7qq3txfVYDL2F/+L9C4wK/j2bYfTGeL3w7Y9 h3BQ==
X-Received: by 10.14.207.195 with SMTP id n43mr68907473eeo.38.1356525899105; Wed, 26 Dec 2012 04:44:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from RoniE (bzq-79-176-219-120.red.bezeqint.net. [79.176.219.120]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 43sm53020908eed.10.2012.12.26.04.44.55 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 26 Dec 2012 04:44:57 -0800 (PST)
From: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: payload@ietf.org
References:
In-Reply-To:
Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 14:42:05 +0200
Message-ID: <01dd01cde366$6be0b3f0$43a21bd0$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_01DE_01CDE377.2F6B7FC0"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: Ac3Y++h0UQghJ/PcRKOitadPT1ArYwKZcbWg
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac@tools.ietf.org
Subject: Re: [payload] WGLC on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02
X-BeenThere: payload@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Audio/Video Transport Payloads working group discussion list <payload.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/payload>, <mailto:payload-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/payload>
List-Post: <mailto:payload@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:payload-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/payload>, <mailto:payload-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Dec 2012 12:45:03 -0000
Hi, I reviewed the draft and have some questions and comments 1. In section 2 there is a mention of target bit rate. It is not clear how is it calculated and what does average during peaks mean? How is this parameter related to the ibitrate parameter defined in the IANA section. 2. In section 2 "The available bandwidth is continuously estimated at the receiving iSAC and signaled in-band in the iSAC bit stream". How does it work? 3. In section 3 second paragraph please discuss using dynamic payload type number maybe add "The assignment of an RTP payload type for the format defined in this memo is outside the scope of this document. The RTP profiles in use currently mandate binding the payload type dynamically for this payload format." 4. In section 3.2 what are the BEI and FL values and how many bits each one uses. 5. In section 3.3 what is bandwidth probe, how does it work. Is it specified elsewhere, in which case provide a reference. 6. In section 3.3 "The user can choose to lower the maximum allowed payload length ". Who is the user(sender / receiver) and how is it done. 7. In section 3.4 how does a receiver know if he receives a wideband or super-wideband payload in order to decode correctly. 8. In section 3.5 "signaled inband". What is inband, any reference? 9. Looking at figure 6 I am not clear from the text how does the receiver know that there is padding and not payload? 10. In section 4 change the beginning to "This RTP payload format is identified using the media type audio/isac, which is registered in accordance with [RFC4855 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4855> ] and uses the template of [RFC4288 <http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4288> ]." 11. Please verify that the registration follows the template. Currently the order is not correct and there are missing subscetions. 12. Since ibitrate and maxbitrate are optional parameters what are the default values if not specified. I saw 20000 for ibitrate for channel adaptive mode in section 2. 13. What are the units for ibitrate and maxbitrate 14. In section 4 the change controller should be the payload working group. 15. In section 5 what is the clock rate in rtpmap. 16. Can you switch from wideband to super wideband without any signaling using the same payload type number. Can you use a 32000 clock rate also for the wideband. 17. The document should have a congestion control section see http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-payload-rtp-howto-02 18. The security section need to be expanded see for example section 10 of RFC 5404. Thanks Roni Even From: Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@gmail.com] Sent: 13 December, 2012 8:35 AM To: 'payload@ietf.org' Cc: 'draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac@tools.ietf.org' Subject: WGLC on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02 Hi, I would like to start a WGLC on http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02 , RTP Payload Format for the iSAC Codec The WGLC will end on January 2nd, 2013 Please review the draft and send comments to the list. For the draft authors; Are you aware of any IPR that applies to draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02? If so, has this IPR been disclosed in compliance with IETF IPR rules (see RFCs 3979, 4879, 3669 and 5378 for more details)? The above question is needed for the document write-up when sent to publication. Thanks Roni Even Payload co-chair _____
- [payload] WGLC on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02 Roni Even
- Re: [payload] WGLC on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02 Roni Even
- Re: [payload] WGLC on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02 Pascal Huart (phuart)
- Re: [payload] WGLC on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02 Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [payload] WGLC on draft-ietf-avt-rtp-isac-02 Roni Even