Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-00.txt

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Mon, 11 July 2011 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC09F21F8C27 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 07:21:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.561
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.038, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CnXWn9MY1Usu for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 07:21:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE5321F8C1D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 07:21:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BDB839E179 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:20:25 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FInaKZ6B+rfT for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:20:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.1.53] (162.80-203-220.nextgentel.com [80.203.220.162]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 72A2E39E087 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:20:24 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E1B06F7.5090807@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:21:43 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110424 Thunderbird/3.1.10
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <20110701055226.2267.16505.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <4E0DE382.9070309@gmail.com> <4E10B49D.2000908@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4E10B49D.2000908@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] I-D Action: draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-00.txt
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2011 14:21:31 -0000

Speaking with editor hat on:

Unless someone else chimes in, I am not going to act on these requests.

I regard the tying of "real-time" to "hundreds of milliseconds" as 
important - I have been in discussions where people have started arguing 
about single-millisecond delays and in discussions where people argue 
that "lag is not important as long as delivery occurs at a constant 
rate" - both are, to my mind, inappropriate and/or irrelevant for our 
use cases.

With regard to "in a given time scale between known ahead-of-time (AOT) 
rate and known just-in-time (JIT) rate", I don't understand its intention.

On 07/03/11 20:27, Dzonatas Sol wrote:
> Before another glossary action happens, let me get this in (can't wait 
> for tomorrow):
>
> >  Real-time media:  Media where generation of content and display of
> >      content are intended to occur closely together in a given time 
> scale.
>
> """
> Real-time media:  Media where generation of content and display of 
> content are intended to occur closely together in a given time scale 
> between known ahead-of-time (AOT) rate and known just-in-time (JIT) rate.
> """
>
> On 07/01/2011 08:10 AM, Dzonatas Sol wrote:
>> Hi, I read the entire overview. Only one concern, in 2.4 Terminology:
>>
>> >  Real-time media:  Media where generation of content and display of
>> >      content are intended to occur closely together in time (on the
>> >     order of no more than hundreds of milliseconds).
>>
>> Can that just read:
>>
>> >  Real-time media:  Media where generation of content and display of
>> >      content are intended to occur closely together in a given time 
>> scale.
>>
>> I've found early specification of date systems may affect assets in 
>> ways unintended (or implied). There is no simple cure, so I think 
>> this is clearer without the noted "hundreds of milliseconds", there.
>>
>> Some have tried to build "authoritative" dates from such real-time 
>> mechanics. Others pass that date thinking it is part of the asset. 
>> I've seen it happen, so I'm just thinking it would be nice to have 
>> some way to say that was not intended, yet I haven't found any.
>>
>> On 06/30/2011 10:52 PM, internet-drafts@ietf.org wrote:
>>> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts 
>>> directories. This draft is a work item of the Real-Time 
>>> Communication in WEB-browsers Working Group of the IETF.
>>>
>>>     Title           : Overview: Real Time Protocols for Brower-based 
>>> Applications
>>>     Author(s)       : Harald T. Alvestrand
>>>     Filename        : draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-00.txt
>>>     Pages           : 13
>>>     Date            : 2011-06-30
>>>
>>>     This document gives an overview and context of a protocol suite
>>>     intended for use with real-time applications that can be 
>>> deployed in
>>>     browsers -&quot;real time communication on the Web&quot;.
>>>
>>>     It intends to serve as a starting and coordination point to make 
>>> sure
>>>     all the parts that are needed to achieve this goal are findable, 
>>> and
>>>     that the parts that belong in the Internet protocol suite are fully
>>>     specified and on the right publication track.
>>>
>>>     This work is an attempt to synthesize the input of many people, but
>>>     makes no claims to fully represent the views of any of them.  All
>>>     parts of the document should be regarded as open for discussion,
>>>     unless the RTCWEB chairs have declared consensus on an item.
>>>
>>>     This document is a candidate to become a work item of the RTCWEB
>>>     working group.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
>>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-00.txt
>>>
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>>
>>> This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview-00.txt
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtcweb mailing list
>>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>>
>>
>>
>
>