[rtcweb] Prioritization

Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca> Fri, 25 April 2014 12:53 UTC

Return-Path: <simon.perreault@viagenie.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 D1FA01A04A3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 05:53:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.173
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.173 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.272, 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 IMUBmXeENuZi for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 05:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from jazz.viagenie.ca (jazz.viagenie.ca [IPv6:2620:0:230:8000::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6946B1A048D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 05:53:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from porto.nomis80.org (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:230:c000:15b:212f:d481:de2b]) by jazz.viagenie.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ECC6F40397 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 08:53:32 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <535A5ACC.9070700@viagenie.ca>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 08:53:32 -0400
From: Simon Perreault <simon.perreault@viagenie.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <20140425084726.8812.24604.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <535A21E3.7070008@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <535A21E3.7070008@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/SpLS0PVMwUgayx3xPwK0sSXL12g
Subject: [rtcweb] Prioritization
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: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 12:53:41 -0000

Le 2014-04-25 04:50, Harald Alvestrand a écrit :
> A.4.  Changes from -03 to -04
> 
>    o  Added a section on prioritization, moved the DSCP section into it,
>       and added a section on local prioritization, giving a specific
>       algorithm for interpreting "priority" in local prioritization.

Harald,

The new text looks good. A comment about this part:

> 			When an RTCWEB implementation has packets to send on multiple streams	
> 			that are congestion-controlled under the same congestion controller,	
> 			the RTCWEB implementation SHOULD serve the streams in a weighted	
> 			round-robin fashion, with each stream at each level of priority being	
> 			given approximately twice the transmission capacity (measured in	
> 			payload bytes) of the level below.

This looks like a QoS algorithm that might get quickly obsoleted by
better ones. We don't want to prevent innovation in this matter by
prescribing an obsolete QoS algorithm.

Suggestion: leave it up to implementations to interpret priority levels
however they want. Reword the current text so that it becomes an
*example* of what an implementation might do.

Simon
-- 
DTN made easy, lean, and smart --> http://postellation.viagenie.ca
NAT64/DNS64 open-source        --> http://ecdysis.viagenie.ca
STUN/TURN server               --> http://numb.viagenie.ca