Re: [rmcat] Genart last call review of draft-ietf-rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback-10

[Colin Perkins <[e-mail]>]

Thanks, Linda. Since these are the same issues raised in your SECDIR review, I’ll not repeat the responses here to avoid fragmenting the discussion.

Colin



On 9 Aug 2022, at 6:21, Linda Dunbar via Datatracker wrote:

> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
> Review result: Almost Ready
>
> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
> Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
> by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
> like any other last call comments.
>
> For more information, please see the FAQ at
>
> <https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq> .
>
> Document: draft-ietf-rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback-10
>
> Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
> Review Date: 2022-08-08
> IETF LC End Date: 2022-08-09
> IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
>
> Summary:
> This document discusses the types of congestion control feedback using the RTP
> Control Protocol. The document analyzes the feedback packet sizes and content
> for point-to-point Voice Telephony and point-to-point Conference call.
>
> Major issues:
> Since most of today's conference bridges are multi-points to multi-points or at
> least multi-points (users) to multi-servers, I think multi-points analysis
> would be more useful. Will the author consider adding them?
>
> As for the Consideration of the RTCP feedback (Section 2), should you also
> consider how far away the endpoints are?  Will network congestion and distances
> impact the RTCP feedback?
>
> Section 1 states, "It is also assumed that the congestion control feedback
> mechanism in RFC8888, .. are available." Question: Is the Congestion Control
> Feedback mechanism described in this document the same as in RRC 8888? What are
> the key differences?
>
> Minor issues:
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> Cheers,
> Linda Dunbar