Re: [rtcweb] PM-DIR review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10

Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Tue, 19 November 2013 10:55 UTC

Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78AC01ADBF7; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:55:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 wEaOOLycnJY5; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:55:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sesbmg20.ericsson.net (sesbmg20.ericsson.net [193.180.251.56]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08DCF1AD7BF; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 02:55:01 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb38-b7f2c8e000006d25-c9-528b437f9585
Received: from ESESSHC015.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by sesbmg20.ericsson.net (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 63.DE.27941.F734B825; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:54:55 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.183.153) by smtp.internal.ericsson.com (153.88.183.65) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.2.328.9; Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:54:54 +0100
Message-ID: <528B437E.5090903@ericsson.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 11:54:54 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>, "pm-dir@ietf.org" <pm-dir@ietf.org>
References: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1293FC7D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA1293FC7D@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprCLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW69c3eQwZRbyhZff/5gtTj6wdJi 7b92dgdmj4Mr57B7LFnykymAKYrLJiU1J7MstUjfLoEr48zsicwFT/gruk/OYGxgPMvTxcjJ ISFgInFw1xcmCFtM4sK99WwgtpDAEUaJezMkuhi5gOzljBLtp6+xgyR4BbQlWvZ/YAWxWQRU JRae+c8IYrMJWEjc/NEI1iwqECxx/tViqHpBiZMzn7CA2CICYRIT5x4F62UWUJe4s/gcWI2w gKvEv+n97BCLgyU+7zsJdhCnQIjEnEVngGwOoOPEJXoagyBa9SSmXG1hhLDlJZq3zmaGaNWW aGjqYJ3AKDQLyeZZSFpmIWlZwMi8ipGjOLU4KTfdyGATIzBkD275bbGD8fJfm0OM0hwsSuK8 H986BwkJpCeWpGanphakFsUXleakFh9iZOLglGpg7HHte30waf++KzsmCHKmp9yO/P0+fFpq 45elvAVhV/bM37t3169wN+cXbmf4OAoXJJUKzdZ/XRm0ZsU5udObVp/99vfkzlvHd8Wz7XhU FXN0g5/b84mefmtuXD1eO0tFqPfwv3XSj0+Vb/kjp/XHx/ZrotTB2QZt8xO75Ep9Nu5Pn1pu 8FgouEGJpTgj0VCLuag4EQCZKIqpJwIAAA==
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] PM-DIR review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 19 Nov 2013 10:55:04 -0000

Hi Dan,

Thanks for your review. I see no issue with changing the document as you
have requested.

Cheers

Magnus

On 2013-11-18 17:45, Romascanu, Dan (Dan) wrote:
> 
> This is the PM-DIR review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage-10. I am the
> assigned PM-DIR reviewer for this I-D.
> 
> This Internet-Draft defines the media transport aspects and provides
> the details of the RTP usage in WebRTC - specifically the
> requirements for which RTP features, profiles and extensions need to
> be supported in WebRTC.
> 
> The I-D does not define performance metrics, so a 6390 review does
> not apply.
> 
> The I-D includes a short section (section 8) dedicated to 'WebRTC Use
> of RTP: Performance Monitoring'. I am fine with the content of this
> section with two comments:
> 
> 1.
>> It is not yet clear
> what extended metrics are appropriate for use in the WebRTC context, 
> so implementations are not expected to generate any RTCP XR packets.
> 
> I believe that it would be more appropriate to replace '
> implementations are not expected ' by ' implementations are not
> required '
> 
> 2.
>> A large number of additional performance metrics are supported by
>> the
> RTCP Extended Reports (XR) framework [RFC3611].
> 
> I think that mentioning 3611 only is limiting nowadays and that RFC
> 6792 should be mentioned as well.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Dan
> 
> _______________________________________________ rtcweb mailing list 
> rtcweb@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> 
> 


-- 

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------