Re: [rtcweb] Meaning of SHOULD support/use interleaving

Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> Mon, 27 October 2014 19:55 UTC

Return-Path: <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
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 92E5A1AD3A0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.561
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.561 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_DE=0.35, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 5NSlXLkNPDR5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:55:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-n.franken.de (drew.ipv6.franken.de [IPv6:2001:638:a02:a001:20e:cff:fe4a:feaa]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8CB111AD392 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 12:55:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.200] (p508F0FB4.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [80.143.15.180]) (Authenticated sender: macmic) by mail-n.franken.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87DA81C104D97; Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:55:17 +0100 (CET)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de>
In-Reply-To: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D4CE9DA@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 20:55:16 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5B74C903-7C9A-4D74-B5CC-D0643A377935@lurchi.franken.de>
References: <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D4CCEEF@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <EA00639E-2008-4BD2-88F2-27AAEE9DA213@lurchi.franken.de> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D4CD241@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <544E8D92.8010401@alvestrand.no> <7594FB04B1934943A5C02806D1A2204B1D4CE9DA@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
To: Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/DnMZ2u6XdQl2sP_LN8a23LiHWV4
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Meaning of SHOULD support/use interleaving
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: Mon, 27 Oct 2014 19:55:25 -0000

On 27 Oct 2014, at 19:41, Christer Holmberg <christer.holmberg@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> 
>>>>> Within the CLUE WG, we had a discussion regarding the following statement in section 6.1 of draft-ietf-rtcweb-data-channel-12.txt:
>>>>> 
>>>>> "The support for message interleaving as defined in
>>>>>                [I-D.ietf-tsvwg-sctp-ndata] SHOULD be used."
>>>>> 
>>>>> First, it is a little unclear what "the support SHOULD be used" means.
>>>> My understanding is that SCTP implementations supporting the extension will use it.
>>>> This is negotiated during the setup of the SCTP association.
>>> If it's done on SCTP level, why do we need to talk about it in the data channel draft? 
>>> 
>>> Is there a reason why it is important to use it for data channels? If so, does it apply to data channels in general? 
>> 
>> NDATA was added in order to avoid head-of-line blocking on the transport (if I understand this correctly, until 
>> this was added, sending a huge message would block the delivery of small messages on all channels until the huge message was fully delivered).
>> 
>> Unlike Michael, I see no reason to make this a SHOULD; I think it should be a MUST, and the older 
>> implementations in browsers should just be called out as non-conformant.
>> 
>> That said, I think that data channels ought to interoperate successfully with implementations that don't support the 
>> extension - but data channel implementations in WebRTC endpoints should be under a "MUST implement, MUST offer" ruleset.
> 
> First, keep in mind that I am NOT talking about WebRTC endpoints (which is one reason we shouldn't call it webrtc data channel to begin with, but that's another story...), but ANY type of endpoint that wants to use a data channel. 
> 
> Second, I am not talking about MUST support, but MUST use/offer.
> 
> Assume I have a CLUE endpoint, which will use a data channel ONLY to transport CLUE messages. CLUE messages aren't that hugeto begin with, and there will be no blocking of small messages on other channels - as there are no other channels.
> 
> So, why does the CLUE endpoint need to offer interleaving?
As far as I know we don't have different flavours of data channels. At least right now.

Best regards
Michael
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Christer
> 
> 
>> Whether messages are interleaved or not depends on the stream scheduler. This is a sender side only decision. The receiver has to deal with it.
>> It is not a MUST, since there are implementations now in use which don't support the extension.
>> 
>> Best regards
>> Michael
>>> 
>>> Second, does it mean that any data channel protocol (e.g CLUE) SHOULD use interleaving, even if the characteristics of the protocol wouldn't require it?
>>> 
>>> Regards,
>>> 
>>> Christer
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> rtcweb mailing list
>>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> 
> 
> --
> Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>