Re: [rmcat] New Version Notification for draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc-04.txt
Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> Sun, 09 November 2014 11:18 UTC
Return-Path: <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
X-Original-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF8911A1A70 for <rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Nov 2014 03:18:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.145
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.145 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GB_SUMOF=1, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.594, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 Xud5xuMpM7a3 for <rmcat@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 9 Nov 2014 03:18:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-n.franken.de (drew.ipv6.franken.de [IPv6:2001:638:a02:a001:20e:cff:fe4a:feaa]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 33E3C1A1A8D for <rmcat@ietf.org>; Sun, 9 Nov 2014 03:18:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.200] (p508F2EA9.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.143.46.169]) (Authenticated sender: macmic) by mail-n.franken.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96BDD1C104FA0; Sun, 9 Nov 2014 12:18:23 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
In-Reply-To: <BB6DC1AF-2EBA-46A2-B09D-1D1A05018CA2@ifi.uio.no>
Date: Sun, 09 Nov 2014 12:18:22 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <EFE7FACB-0896-448B-B4E8-F9FBA1BE15F7@lurchi.franken.de>
References: <20141024124538.23846.1832.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <BB6DC1AF-2EBA-46A2-B09D-1D1A05018CA2@ifi.uio.no>
To: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rmcat/lCDyUDIowTeOWSVoYnbp5vW4VIg
Cc: "rmcat@ietf.org WG" <rmcat@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rmcat] New Version Notification for draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc-04.txt
X-BeenThere: rmcat@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Sun, 09 Nov 2014 11:18:29 -0000
On 24 Oct 2014, at 14:50, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> wrote: > Hi folks, > > This is just to inform you that we have submitted an update of the coupled-cc draft. Since there is now some interest in shared bottleneck detection, wouldn't that be a good time to consider reading this companion document too, which describes what SBD can be good for? :-) => please read and comment. More information at: > http://heim.ifi.uio.no/~safiquli/coupled-cc/index.html > > This update mentions that the mechanism should also work for window-based controllers; we say this because we have some early, quite promising simulation results with LEDBAT. Hi Michael, I really like this ID. Some comments: * Why do you need the first paragraph in Section 2? I don't think you use any RFC 2119 language in the document (There is one MAY, which doesn't need to be RFC 2119). Even if you do, put this paragraph in its own section. * Why do you require the priority P in Section 5.2 to be a floating point number. In Section 4 you envision an FSE being implemented in a operating system kernel. Not all kernels support floating point operations. * I don't understand "(including the flow itself)" since you are talking about a FG, not a flow, in In the FSE, each FG contains one static variable S_CR which is meant to be the sum of the calculated rates of all flows in the same FG (including the flow itself). * Can the algorithms work in integer arithmetic? * You don't describe what happens if the SBD changes a FGI of a flow. * Maybe writing in 5.3.1 (a) DELTA = CC_R - FSE_R(f) S_CR = S_CR + DELTA and in 5.3.2 (a) if Timer is not running then DELTA = CC_R - FSE_R(f) if DELTA >= 0 then S_CR = S_CR + DELTA else // Reduce S_CR proportionally S_CR = S_CR * CC_R / FSE_R(f) Start Timer for 2 RTTs end if end if and stressing the point that 5.3.1 (b) and 5.3.2 (b) are equal and 5.3.1 (c) and 5.3.2 (c) are equal makes it simpler to get the difference between the two algorithms. But this is just cosmetic... Best regards Michael > > Cheers, > Michael > > > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: <internet-drafts@ietf.org> >> Subject: New Version Notification for draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc-04.txt >> Date: 24. oktober 2014 14:45:38 GMT+02:00 >> To: Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>, Safiqul Islam <safiquli@ifi.uio.no>, Stein Gjessing <steing@ifi.uio.no>, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no>, Safiqul Islam <safiquli@ifi.uio.no>, Stein Gjessing <steing@ifi.uio.no> >> >> >> A new version of I-D, draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc-04.txt >> has been successfully submitted by Michael Welzl and posted to the >> IETF repository. >> >> Name: draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc >> Revision: 04 >> Title: Coupled congestion control for RTP media >> Document date: 2014-10-24 >> Group: Individual Submission >> Pages: 20 >> URL: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc-04.txt >> Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc/ >> Htmlized: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc-04 >> Diff: http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-welzl-rmcat-coupled-cc-04 >> >> Abstract: >> When multiple congestion controlled RTP sessions traverse the same >> network bottleneck, it can be beneficial to combine their controls >> such that the total on-the-wire behavior is improved. This document >> describes such a method for flows that have the same sender, in a way >> that is as flexible and simple as possible while minimizing the >> amount of changes needed to existing RTP applications. >> >> >> >> >> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission >> until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. >> >> The IETF Secretariat >> >
- [rmcat] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-w… Michael Welzl
- Re: [rmcat] New Version Notification for draft-we… Michael Tuexen
- Re: [rmcat] New Version Notification for draft-we… Safiqul Islam