Re: [rmcat] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled-cc-03

Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com> Thu, 15 September 2016 08:50 UTC

From: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>
To: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
Thread-Topic: [rmcat] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled-cc-03
Thread-Index: AdIJrlQsUy2I7lvrTt2HyJHgA02zGQAz8McAASv6zVA=
Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:50:18 +0000
Message-ID: <DB4PR07MB348535EB018140277BFEB44C2F00@DB4PR07MB348.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com>
References: <DB4PR07MB3486A82FFA43E0E9D4AFCF5C2FB0@DB4PR07MB348.eurprd07.prod.outlook.com> <5A859713-5BB0-4285-AA1E-F1C99FF7FBE6@ifi.uio.no>
In-Reply-To: <5A859713-5BB0-4285-AA1E-F1C99FF7FBE6@ifi.uio.no>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
received-spf: None (protection.outlook.com: ericsson.com does not designate permitted sender hosts)
spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 15 Sep 2016 08:50:18.9516 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 92e84ceb-fbfd-47ab-be52-080c6b87953f
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DB4PR07MB345
X-OriginatorOrg: ericsson.com
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA02SbUhTYRTHe3bvrnfDwXU5PZiSDFyk5VtJNkRKMvRDUF9aSOKWXtxQp+2q NCVcZclmE9EItChfVmpLoqXpypKNmDMdhQS6idFIUAlrrJdZobXtGvTt9zz/H+c85+GQmPAa N45UqWtpjVpRKSb4eNeZMdl+l9wjS59sTcvecFm52Wa3jzjCKTCZfnIKzGYvdpJTxM8poytV 9bQmLVfOV070OYgafdSFwOoeHXoiMCAeCdRBaJ+Z5BoQnxRSjxB4b+lw9uBEMPTeSYQOOGXE 4MrSCMEmnRxw3OzY1hwIvvS1YqFiBJUDQ/YACnE0JQHngJkIMUYlwPy6Ncw7qWPgbenjsE4+ GNwr274UXhmmw3VwKgkcvoWwL6CKQLf2DGObtSHwvVjghgIelQumfl9EiBEVA4HXDzlss1jw LN/lsNNRYJp4g7EsgrWPW1zWLwW/28hl7xNhanCdYPkEdFquh8cEap0A40TXdpAPX186t1kF v8aWg0wGWQp3ZotZ/ymCsbdzEawTD6MuPcYGTi74mj14KBBSNAwMX0XsV8TB0js9akfJ3f89 nOV90PPcT7CcAvd7P2Hd4d+IgumuZbwH4Q+QiKEZpqo8MzOV1qhKGaZanaqmay0ouB22kd/S cWRbOWpHFInEkYIPMrdMyFXUM9oqOwISE0cLooLLIxSUKbQNtKa6RFNXSTN2tIvExbGCLde8 TEiVK2rpCpquoTX/Ug7Ji9OhlrZvfm9j4Eah57OnYsnavOnPy5CM60vOGUUFeasXpwI/RAFn 444s0Xee9rzNe2DSmrXb5tjr7igsrjptvbS4Ea3unUmwZJ2VdirllsGme7OP+aIUInC57lB6 eaO2QR7fvhnTr1bennOPkk2nhhcl2YcjJW1JCYXH/5QktsyJcUapyEjGNIziL5t8TV8ZAwAA
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rmcat/0VTRoO-4Tgs2ugZuPbMdtSZdPAk>
Cc: rmcat WG <rmcat@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rmcat] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled-cc-03
X-BeenThere: rmcat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "RTP Media Congestion Avoidance Techniques \(RMCAT\) Working Group discussion list." <rmcat.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rmcat>, <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rmcat/>
List-Post: <mailto:rmcat@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rmcat>, <mailto:rmcat-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2016 08:50:31 -0000

Hi

The suggested addition to section 7 sounds good.

Regards
/Ingemar

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Welzl [mailto:michawe@ifi.uio.no]
> Sent: den 9 september 2016 11:40
> To: Ingemar Johansson S <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com>
> Cc: rmcat WG <rmcat@ietf.org>
> Subject: Re: [rmcat] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled-cc-03
> 
> Hi Ingemar!
> 
> Thanks for reading our draft. Answers in line:
> 
> 
> > On 08 Sep 2016, at 15:16, Ingemar Johansson S
> <ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > I have read through draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled-cc-03, just a few comments.
> >
> > List of variables :
> > I find myself scrolling forth and back in the document I search for an
> explanation to all the variables, perhaps a dedicated list of variables and their
> meaning would be good ?
> 
> Agreed, we will do that.
> 
> 
> > Section 5.3.1 :
> > My understanding here is that this algorithm does assume that the media
> coder will produce an output bitrate that is FSE_R. In reality the output rate
> from a video coder may be considerably lower than the target if for instance
> the image is more or less static. I guess that the means that bandwidth
> becomes unallocated or ? .
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> > It seems like this "underutilization problem" is  discussed in Appendix B
> where the "desired rate" is mention, is this DR to be set equal to the video
> coder output rate ?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> We wanted to deal with the case of a video coder sending less than allowed
> from the start; the "desired rate" was therefore a part of the main text from
> the beginning.
> Later, upon request to simplify our algorithm, we moved it to the appendix.
> 
> We do think that this would be a good thing to address as the document
> moves to PS, so we suggest to insert, in section 7 ("Expected feedback from
> experiments"):
> "Experiments should investigate cases where the media coder's output rate
> is below the rate that is calculated by the coupling algorithm (FSE_R in
> algorithms 1 and 2, section 5.3)."
> 
> Cheers,
> Michael

[rmcat] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-rmcat-coupled… Ingemar Johansson S
Re: [rmcat] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-rmcat-cou… Michael Welzl
Re: [rmcat] WGLC comments on draft-ietf-rmcat-cou… Ingemar Johansson S