[rtcweb] What is wrong with probation (just padding) RTP packets within the media stream?
Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net> Thu, 21 September 2017 20:23 UTC
Return-Path: <ibc@aliax.net>
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 22B27133063 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 13:23:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=aliax-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com
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 pcG1QDvHQJrw for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 13:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wm0-x235.google.com (mail-wm0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::235]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05FFF126BF3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 13:23:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wm0-x235.google.com with SMTP id m72so4975968wmc.1 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 13:23:32 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=aliax-net.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZfIlqofThQMHs2k97oOtqkuQFJHdewvWUScmDeuCDoo=; b=dmctJnk8CiPmQ63HzCYw8RWIbATU9mB8/wH1KMRhzUSKqQrrW9va6QM5KbjRNfNNa4 73GDlI1x2ni+p/LmM030LEm2L4vRZFUD/gHBUTrF0DtxQjYUgNNYa6Br0s0nGpZ6BDCa zOM3vBmp7z9ZqpeTncncCiO2WB4wA4m6BaDwdh8hzC5GGWzUKERv61L8jBc2aKxuQGUd 4NQHyDQQ1Z9AEkNkzLDAwJLRZ2vPc1vJq68mSDoIkZX5EWknTMUbGT4fEghNjT+wEFoV F7QeLKK5E8Hx4La2QjrH01EcYx65Z4SaWEDgxmYpVLt5D3syruuKo+Qa6Q8PiJjPSoon 7OVA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZfIlqofThQMHs2k97oOtqkuQFJHdewvWUScmDeuCDoo=; b=L66iSoxEWSCoRGj8j+pURAiBfkzdbuYHdLUllDiaSg23owEYs0Zy3f5M0BWCo7d6gl NvswEcAR1Cuoi7tkyNPEQwImWlT7GroO1hrsKlx23p/o10MUj9no/G/75lBm26BbxIO4 wj4Jg/vLwlJUs0wv8kqRHt7pBly3ncoxQ/11lx8zk6zbm0rurX1pRBGuHy14IzYQ3oy2 TO+akYPKlKB2LsnAw/wRk19K3pkWW5OLyWvRv6Bi+R0PyzWEYygrQoJs33s2ZO0eZrZP tZmGD0gtsClrZg7KTU5q72kI6eXFlj7EFCMbR3V0yf/1IrLCJOfmI57fXQybCLY2fWku RyUA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AHPjjUgRAihvvzkUthEx11jTGjGP7KZV70uRqV85/y1YjtFIhB6SAdQM GPPgXxmbzzy/bPB5TVqyymEZ2pOBzlh62LSSDm11WpqK
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QAPXWiBTPqeEuHO87beayE6zcENfg+LCNrN9SkucTdMTF+5svnfPB15OnDD9vK8fD5cqoK2OMXItuDoMRD7Tr0=
X-Received: by 10.80.147.91 with SMTP id n27mr2547005eda.36.1506025411199; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 13:23:31 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.80.214.6 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Sep 2017 13:23:10 -0700 (PDT)
From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 22:23:10 +0200
Message-ID: <CALiegfmrwEAsARF+OT4shhR3b9YJtXNOcgc4C7O=xA7=vmtO2Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/K7h4tqTKvMa0UDsHwN6C1Pc0l6w>
Subject: [rtcweb] What is wrong with probation (just padding) RTP packets within the media stream?
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 20:23:35 -0000
Hi, just wondering if something is "illegal" in the following approach: - For each RTP video packet received, the server (an SFU) also sends a probation RTP packet to the receivers. - Such a RTP probation packet has the same media SSRC and PT, with marker bit=0, padding bit=1, zero payload and N bytes of padding. It also has the same RTP timestamp that the video media packet and seq+1. However, the receiver (Chrome in this case) does not render video. By enabling its webrtc logs it does not complain at all. Said that, I've also tried to send those probation packets *just* after a video packet with marker bit=1. And it works. It seems that, having the same timestamp than an already completed video frame, Chrome does not complain. However I wonder what is wrong with sending the above probation packets between video packets with same ts and marker bit=0. Why is that wrong? or is it just that this specific browser does not like it for any reason? Thanks a lot. -- Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
- [rtcweb] What is wrong with probation (just paddi… Iñaki Baz Castillo