IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] [Suspected Junk Mail] Endpoints that don't support RTCP

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> Wed, 22 April 2015 18:44 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@iii.ca>
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 1C63F1AD376 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 11:44:57 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_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 YnDyiH86Uzb2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 11:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6684A1AD373 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 11:44:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.4.100] (unknown [128.107.241.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A26E5509BF; Wed, 22 Apr 2015 14:44:53 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2098\))
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <55365D4A.30507@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 12:44:51 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <151887E0-B94D-4FC7-92FD-3C150C343C1B@iii.ca>
References: <CAOJ7v-01DhCKewmC-Cvh4Z-jeOmi=CunisjFWceoPfk2ZM9Wgg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPvvaa+SNPY+Ait2c8w9GPT-QfP7LEiuU6ejrokba93k60DdVg@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnW6KFuJhswLK97LE6J=9vqkf-cmeRMZOuz516ZryeSRQw@mail.gmail.com> <CAPvvaa+wid8y2h0g2040V8bSr50+rQRzpg-tCTK9EUFmtJrZYw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUt2fwdOWqTjHUjkUZN_aqAfrBW90Q4Q-EPrid4sCSWQg@mail.gmail.com> <BB960D2D-3176-4D54-8133-7F12B79DCAFA@cisco.com> <CABkgnnWuRYW8w6xCLt2dJVZ1ePxAxZWbyYqrV68cZaA2uHgmGg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-3W7+Lfd8DCs_91K_DGaqjdyZ_qtkoQBiSO2pi-j1fuOA@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXOXc+Jq4mSq02_As9ii5g_EpeRnO_sVF+OnZrLoGC9Xg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOJ7v-0niXySrvkPnSGXA5YVe_O5YVvae_8zGsEYtPqpw43UZw@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWzdn9FVO27G7ioz5soLhckseAEEHV+QZJsyiTOD_sYnA@mail.gmail.com> <551A902A.9080402@alvestrand.no> <CABkgnnU+r-8UXXMVKt_eiK_hd3eutWpUXiGQ=KsGrwCxB11cMg@mail.gmail.com> <55361DCA.7000101@e ricsson.com> <FD283114-7F7D-402E-A489-1FAF4E6B38B6@iii.ca> <55365D4A.30507@ericsson.com>
To: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2098)
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/Ch61SFdbKqmtB--83Pu_Yrb3tmg>
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [Suspected Junk Mail] Endpoints that don't support RTCP
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: Wed, 22 Apr 2015 18:44:57 -0000

> On Apr 21, 2015, at 8:23 AM, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> wrote:
> 
> Cullen Jennings skrev den 2015-04-21 14:42:
>> 
>> That sounds workable but I think the 72 kbps is a bit low when you
>> consider header extensions for audio level and other things. I'd be
>> more comfortable with something closer to100 kbps. Given the
>> granularity of circuit breakers I don't think 100 vs 72 is going to
>> make circuit breaker not work.
> 
> Sorry, but I specified it as RTP Payload bit-rate, which would exclude
> header extension. My thought would be to allow for 64 kbps codec plus
> some payload format overhead.

Ah, OK, that works.  I don't care how it get specified as long as it allows that use case. 

> 
> However, I have to ask if really audio level header extensions and
> legacy audio endpoint that don't send RTCP being a likely combination?


Yes, unfortunately, very likely


> 
> Cheers
> 
> Magnus Westerlund
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
> Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email