Re: [rtcweb] draft-jesup-rtp-congestion-reqs-00.txt: Requirements for RTP congestion control

"James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com> Sun, 04 March 2012 22:16 UTC

Return-Path: <jmpolk@cisco.com>
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 22DCB21F853B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 14:16:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -109.563
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.563 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.809, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, SARE_SUB_OBFU_Q1=0.227, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NnuG+5R9XrCQ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 14:16:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mtv-iport-1.cisco.com (mtv-iport-1.cisco.com [173.36.130.12]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 450D521F8531 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 14:16:42 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=jmpolk@cisco.com; l=2806; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1330899402; x=1332109002; h=message-id:date:to:from:subject:in-reply-to:references: mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cbOJOM1P1NaZtcLL0qr2TvlMBzm6s58qhPjXLzKVTR4=; b=LaV+E24hF20GWpmTN8vWnt/y2Thz4dPd0qycR5Rj2dNZZLr+ezS+Wiun 0/rZ9Puuw9f2GqK9KdFb/vX31BqNSlTvV/mF1b43gJUNEbbC9h9b1Dtxk OFFegUwcUYJRFCaAI8I7VdKX4K3OVfxMTWECJW7yT08qIrWQNG2BKtMN4 E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EANLoU0+rRDoH/2dsb2JhbABDtEKBB4F9AQEBBAEBAQ8BJTYXBAcCAhEDAQIBJwcZDh8JCAYBCQkJGYdkDJltAZ17kF0EiB0znQCDAg
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.73,531,1325462400"; d="scan'208";a="31867478"
Received: from mtv-core-2.cisco.com ([171.68.58.7]) by mtv-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Mar 2012 22:16:41 +0000
Received: from jmpolk-wxp01.cisco.com (rcdn-jmpolk-8711.cisco.com [10.99.80.18]) by mtv-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q24MGfal019061; Sun, 4 Mar 2012 22:16:41 GMT
Message-Id: <201203042216.q24MGfal019061@mtv-core-2.cisco.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 7.1.0.9
Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 16:16:40 -0600
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
From: "James M. Polk" <jmpolk@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <4F53E513.40002@alvestrand.no>
References: <4F53E513.40002@alvestrand.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] draft-jesup-rtp-congestion-reqs-00.txt: Requirements for RTP congestion control
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 22:16:43 -0000

Harald

Which of these two is expected to be the conflict with rtp-congestion hour?

TUESDAY, March 27, 2012

1500-1520  Beverage and Snack Break I - Hall Maillot A
1520-1700  Afternoon Session II
252A                    IRTF    iccrg 
Internet Congestion Control Research Group
Maillot                 RAI     avtext 
Audio/Video Transport Extensions WG
253                     RAI     vipr 
Verification Involving PSTN Reachability WG

1710-1810  Afternoon Session III
252A                    IRTF    iccrg 
Internet Congestion Control Research Group
252B                    RAI     sipcore 
Session Initiation Protocol Core WG

I vote for Session II, but that's just one voice.

Since most of us aren't part of the ICCRG mailing 
list, can you ask and pass along which session 
the rtp-congestion hour long discussion will be in? Thanks

BTW - there already is no TSV conflict during either timeslot.

James

At 03:56 PM 3/4/2012, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>For the WG's interest.
>This (among other inputs) will be discussed in 
>the IRTF ICCRG WG on Tuesday in Paris.
>
>Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â  Harald
>
>-------- Original Message --------
>Subject: New Version Notification for draft-jesup-rtp-congestion-reqs-00.txt
>Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2012 06:19:29 -0800
>From: <mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org>internet-drafts@ietf.org
>To: <mailto:harald@alvestrand.no>harald@alvestrand.no
>CC: <mailto:randell-ietf@jesup.org>randell-ietf@jesup.org
>
>
>
>A new version of I-D, 
>draft-jesup-rtp-congestion-reqs-00.txt has been 
>successfully submitted by Harald Alvestrand and posted to the IETF repository.
>
>Filename:        draft-jesup-rtp-congestion-reqs
>Revision:        00
>Title:           Congestion Control Requirements For Real Time Media
>Creation date:   2012-03-04
>WG ID:           Individual Submission
>Number of pages: 7
>
>Abstract:
>    Congestion control is needed for all data transported across the
>    Internet, in order to promote fair usage and prevent congestion
>    collapse.  The requirements for interactive, point-to-point real time
>    multimedia, which needs by low-delay, semi-reliable data delivery,
>    are different from the requirements for bulk transfer like FTP or
>    bursty transfers like Web pages, and the TCP algorithms are not
>    suitable for this traffic.
>
>    This document attempts to describe a set of requirements that can be
>    used to evaluate other congestion control mechanisms in order to
>    figure out their fitness for this purpose.
>
>
> 
>
>
>
>The IETF Secretariat
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>rtcweb mailing list
>rtcweb@ietf.orghttps://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb