IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-jennings-rtcweb-qos (Re: Call for adoption of QoS draft)

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Mon, 17 September 2012 22:16 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@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 B315A21F8718 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 15:16:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id TTqYOOG2p-71 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 15:16:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com [173.37.86.77]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 188E821F8716 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 15:16:53 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1514; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1347920213; x=1349129813; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=ng7hAXXJu6zJqAFVtA1jlkgToTNF7i5fxE4XzpzmXm4=; b=g27s9bVUbRyU3obfGnIY9tisIpsNUKoRSPhmHTOx1TudilB5XaDJgIOq ofMZL5sIoH0u4WbR6MS1F1Ld6J3kwDZNaMUJameUgKLe987MPpddVKBS9 mtSKoRumMgvG4HtDApSqT12d6MJNYU5T1Bu14LObyjhzCck+DAyB1be5b I=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EALKgV1CtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABFvCKBB4IgAQEBAwESAQpSCgULAgEIGC4yJQIEDgUih1gGmkigEoshhghgA5IxgzGOOIFpgmaCFw
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.80,438,1344211200"; d="scan'208";a="122518108"
Received: from rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com ([173.37.113.188]) by rcdn-iport-6.cisco.com with ESMTP; 17 Sep 2012 22:16:52 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com [173.36.12.81]) by rcdn-core2-1.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8HMGqYO003848 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 17 Sep 2012 22:16:52 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.26]) by xhc-aln-x07.cisco.com ([173.36.12.81]) with mapi id 14.02.0298.004; Mon, 17 Sep 2012 17:16:52 -0500
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-jennings-rtcweb-qos (Re: Call for adoption of QoS draft)
Thread-Index: AQHNlSIjsrLEzuMwRUC7DF2XqhTaEw==
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 22:16:51 +0000
Message-ID: <185CB042-686A-42F4-A85C-934C6489D0BA@cisco.com>
References: <CA+9kkMBo10T=EgRXmkeB1vfB6MdUMVeWUpZowoXdP=E_+rm+mQ@mail.gmail.com> <504DF5EF.7070602@alvestrand.no> <CABkgnnVckXWQqGR2PhKz+ZO4wphzw6YxEKBRJq-KEUgYT8Agxg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnVckXWQqGR2PhKz+ZO4wphzw6YxEKBRJq-KEUgYT8Agxg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.20.249.167]
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-10.2.0.1135-7.000.1014-19188.004
x-tm-as-result: No--25.702200-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <3D15EC925DAEC44F824DEF60581EEC9C@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Comments on draft-jennings-rtcweb-qos (Re: Call for adoption of QoS draft)
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: Mon, 17 Sep 2012 22:16:53 -0000

On Sep 10, 2012, at 10:38 , Martin Thomson wrote:

> On 10 September 2012 07:15, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
>> - Pointers to documentation on how browsers are expected to be able to set
>> QCI and WiFI markings would be a good addition. Compared to those, DSCP
>> codepoint setting is well understood.
> 
> I agree that this would be useful, if the draft really did make
> implementation (and use) of those markings a "SHOULD".  See below.
> 
>> - I find it good that these 3 mechanisms are the only ones considered in the
>> draft. I'm making the leap of faith that we intend to state that an
>> implementation MUST implement DSCP codepoint marking, SHOULD implement QCI
>> and WiFI markings when attached to appropriate interfaces, and that no other
>> mechanism is going to get a MUST or SHOULD recommendation from the WG. If
>> I'm right, can we make that explicit?
> 
> What do people think about NOT including QCI/WiFi markings?  Is it not
> possible for a wireless interface to examine DSCP markings in order to
> determine the markings for the link?  We should endeavour to maintain
> the proper abstractions.

On some OS is it is possible to see them but ignoring that … think for a second  about what these marketing are meant to be used for -  they are more meant to be seen by the network not the browser at the far end so not sure this matters much if the some OS can't provide this information to the application

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email