Re: [rmcat] comments on draft-alvestrand-rmcat-remb-02

["Alfred E. Heggestad" <[e-mail]>]

Hi Varun,

okay, thanks for the info!


/alfred

On 10/6/13 6:45 PM, Varun Singh wrote:
> Hi Alfred,
>
> Some comment inline.
>
> -Varun
>
> On Sun, Oct 6, 2013 at 3:16 PM, Alfred E. Heggestad <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have some comments/questions about draft-alvestrand-rmcat-remb-02
>>
>>
>> - is the new RTCP AFB message valid for all kinds of streams ?
>>    audio, video etc ?
>>
>
> It depends on how many and which SSRCs are reported in the feedback message.
> As per the draft, it is up to the implementation (or the congestion
> control algorithm)
> to choose which SSRCs, i.e., it could report just the SSRCs of audio
> or video or a combination.
>
>> - the maximum bitrate, is it defined as the maximum bitrate for
>>    a particular stream, or the maximum bitrate for the whole "Session" ?
>>
>
> One method of calculating the receiver's maximum estimate is defined by
> Google's congestion control (GCC) in
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-congestion
>
> As per GCC, REMB can be used for reporting the sum of the receiver
> estimate across all media streams that share the same end-to-end path.
> I supposed the SSRCs of the multiple media streams that make up the
> aggregate estimate
> are reported in the block.
>
>> - the message is using a unique identifier "REMB" to de-multiplex incoming
>>    AFB messages, is this method defined in a spec somewhere, and is there
>
> The demultiplexing is defined in Section 6.4 of RFC4585,
> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4585#section-6.4
>
>>    a central registry of other types of AFB messages?
>>
>> - section 2.3 OPEN ISSUE, I dont think explicit signaling is needed.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> /alfred
>
>
>