[rmcat] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model-06: (with COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu> Thu, 07 February 2019 02:32 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@mit.edu>
To: The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Cc: draft-ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model@ietf.org, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>, rmcat-chairs@ietf.org, csp@csperkins.org, rmcat@ietf.org
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Precedence: bulk
Message-ID: <154950672368.32758.6588250983296174804.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2019 18:32:03 -0800
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rmcat/typ06ElTcvDei2TPy-ESRV-bzlo>
Subject: [rmcat] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model-06: (with COMMENT)

Benjamin Kaduk has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model-06: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)


Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.


The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-rmcat-video-traffic-model/



----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for the easy-to-read, well-written document.  I just have a few
minor (IIUC) editorial comments.

Section 4

Do we need to define I-frame?  (And P-frame, in Section 6.1 later.)

Section 6.1

Could the text (either here or in a previous section) call out more clearly
that n_s is a (new) defined parameter for the simulation?

Section 6.2.1

I think I'm missing a qualifier somewhere -- in the first bullet point of
the main algorithm, we see that:

                                                      It is assumed that
      the value of R_v is clipped within the range [R_min, R_max].

but later on the section we calculate frame sizes for cases where  b) R_v <
r_min , and c) r_v >= R_max.  What am I missing that makes these two places
in the text different?

                  factor = R_v / R_min

Does it matter if I use integer or floating-point arithmetic to compute
'factor'?  (Same question for R_max as well, of course.)

[rmcat] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draft-ie… Benjamin Kaduk
Re: [rmcat] Benjamin Kaduk's No Objection on draf… Xiaoqing Zhu (xiaoqzhu)