IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage

Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> Thu, 08 May 2014 12:54 UTC

Return-Path: <csp@csperkins.org>
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 F0BBB1A04B9 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 May 2014 05:54:27 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9] 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 lq9nlGXj5WPQ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 8 May 2014 05:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from haggis.mythic-beasts.com (haggis.mythic-beasts.com [IPv6:2a00:1098:0:86:1000:0:2:1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 947A51A03DC for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 8 May 2014 05:54:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [82.132.222.70] (port=13631 helo=[10.168.3.228]) by haggis.mythic-beasts.com with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <csp@csperkins.org>) id 1WiNq6-0008I2-L4; Thu, 08 May 2014 13:54:21 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11D201)
In-Reply-To: <C9834672-6685-471C-83B9-B52CB8532573@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2014 13:54:08 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2CE99351-87F9-4815-913A-092C1B703D8A@csperkins.org>
References: <CAOW+2dsdEZyzs4Qu6+z55JcgiwaOWNQ0pHz=8-buuH1+3TJj8w@mail.gmail.com> <D3F43C35-2B37-4111-8803-46B6DED248E7@csperkins.org> <C9834672-6685-471C-83B9-B52CB8532573@gmail.com>
To: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
X-BlackCat-Spam-Score: -28
X-Mythic-Debug: Threshold = On =
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/OV9PPc1OF2nG2wHmLGK3bBHzl8s
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Review of draft-ietf-rtcweb-rtp-usage
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: Thu, 08 May 2014 12:54:28 -0000

On 8 May 2014, at 13:43, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 8, 2014, at 3:45, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org> wrote:
>> The fix here is to delete “In the absence of a concrete congestion control algorithm, all”, leaving the text as “WebRTC implementations MUST implement the RTP circuit breaker…” since as you note, we want the circuit breaker even if there is congestion control.
> 
> [BA] The question I have is whether this would be widely implemented. The Circuit Breaker algorithm pauses sessions, but has no mechanism to resume them, so it increases brittleness. 

The circuit breaker is a mechanism of last resort. If we've designed it correctly, it will only stop sessions that are otherwise unusable. The resume mechanism is the redial button on the user interface. With a reasonable congestion control algorithm, the circuit breaker should never be triggered.

Colin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email