Re: [rmcat] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Mon, 11 July 2022 14:34 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
X-Original-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C948C14F613 for <rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 07:34:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -7.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.105 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_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=csperkins.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id yOxPu9kz_EOt for <rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 07:34:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx2.mythic-beasts.com (mx2.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:82:1000:0:2:1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21EE9C14CF17 for <rmcat@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 07:34:48 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=csperkins.org; s=mythic-beasts-k1; h=Date:Subject:To:From; bh=0/7NTH1ygMweZqeQfKyVzLELqex/dq8wETk7txBUYJI=; b=jGgaGJPANvdLZmt4d94QaxfC88 3fXPP6gnJlqbPxQRW1bJyelltSj88Sni+mraHP31sg7bQxOv11T6SYep9kSNuXtDxk7l5FiP6Zmrt HArbkrIM8OUxza5ddBmvxjVabDldQUem8YOgcrRMNmnQvoXSaaUpiqU84ZQwkNAiRTaKrDaqS9/vX C52UNbie8TOugumKxqakP59yegV/M7SSdpuS4HXCyyl/a3Ghizx5t8ggQ8md9C0k1xO/+eGEwlPJr gmCBcG12MFLOZrU7ivFROeeDsfqXX8MTSc9h5kxipMPzWCEB7goSmNUOVZLR4AZGvrklMlCYa14Zy 2lGBYoVw==;
Received: from [81.187.2.149] (port=48234 helo=[192.168.0.72]) by mailhub-hex-d.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from <csp@csperkins.org>) id 1oAuUn-00AOmS-6S; Mon, 11 Jul 2022 15:34:45 +0100
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
To: Anna Brunström <anna.brunstrom@kau.se>
Cc: rm <rmcat@ietf.org>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 15:34:40 +0100
X-Mailer: MailMate (1.14r5903)
Message-ID: <F59F6F3A-D164-4498-A3AC-98C5DD7DC6FB@csperkins.org>
In-Reply-To: <9ea02f41ec784f729413fe2f5c2adc80@kau.se>
References: <9ea02f41ec784f729413fe2f5c2adc80@kau.se>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_MailMate_6D0B71D3-3374-47F2-93C4-EA8F3AF0D8AB_="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Embedded-HTML: [{"plain":[133, 2063], "uuid":"6E6E4D3C-DCBE-4506-B363-80F1E7D7B330"}]
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: 0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rmcat/8L6ENQtIdZMyLRYMZKsU99VmiKM>
Subject: Re: [rmcat] Shepherd's review of draft-ietf-rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback
X-BeenThere: rmcat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
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: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 14:34:53 -0000

Version -09 has been submitted, that’s intended to address these 
comments.
Colin


On 9 Mar 2022, at 0:45, Anna Brunström wrote:

> Dear all,
>
> I am preparing the shepherd's write-up for 
> draft-ietf-rmcat-rtp-cc-feedback. I have a few editorial comments from 
> the shepherd's review of the document. You can find them included 
> below.
>
> Best Regards,
> Anna
>
>
> Section 1:
> [RFC8861], [RFC8861]
> remove duplicate reference
>
> Section 2:
> 2. Possible Models for RTCP Feedback
> Title does not really reflect the content of the section, suggest 
> "Considerations for RTCP Feedback"
>
> so-called "stretch-ACK" behaviour is non-standard and not guaranteed
> Perhaps add a reference for stretch ACKs?
>
> The RTP standards have long said that a 5% overhead for RTCP traffic 
> generally acceptable
> ... traffic is generally acceptable
>
> possibility with a higher overhead?
> possibly with a higher overhead
>
> changes the sending rate
> changes to the sending rate
>
> Section 3.1:
>
> Tf seconds (Tf = 20ms in many cases, but values up to 60ms are not 
> uncommon)
> mismatch in the units
>
> The CCFB packets contains
> The CCFB packets contain
>
> Table 1: RTCP bandwidth needed for VoIP feedback
> Table 1: RTCP bandwidth needed for VoIP feedback (compound reports 
> only) - To be consistent with Table 2 caption
>
> Section 3.2:
>
> Draft says: These "non-compound" (actually, compound but reduced size 
> in this case) RTCP packets
> After this, the text use a mix of "non-compound" and "reduced size". I 
> find this a bit confusing. Maybe better to stick to one.
>
> every frames
> every frame
>
> Section 4:
> needs be
> needs to be
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Professor Anna Brunstrom
> Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
> Karlstad University
> 651 88 Karlstad, Sweden
> Phone:   +46 54 7001795
> E-mail:  anna.brunstrom@kau.se
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> När du skickar e-post till Karlstads universitet behandlar vi dina 
> personuppgifter<https://www.kau.se/gdpr> .
> When you send an e-mail to Karlstad University, we will process your 
> personal data<https://www.kau.se/en/gdpr> .