IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] [xrblock] FW: I-DAction:draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-stats-registry-00.txt

"Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com> Fri, 28 September 2012 23:51 UTC

Return-Path: <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.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 C3B0921F859B for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:51:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.582
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.582 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.667, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 W-mib18-TZnt for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A64B221F8528 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:51:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.64]) by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id q8SNp8cE003916 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Sat, 29 Sep 2012 01:51:08 +0200
Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.50]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB04.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.64]) with mapi; Sat, 29 Sep 2012 01:51:07 +0200
From: "Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht)" <albrecht.schwarz@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2012 01:51:05 +0200
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] [xrblock] FW: I-DAction:draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-stats-registry-00.txt
Thread-Index: Ac2dbOmrUTaleRBfTnqIdAsRmTFuKQAZrUTA
Message-ID: <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96218CF78F67@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A04081AB2D9@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com><3C8D9E30D9654AD0A3E1F21668D1CBFB@china.huawei.com> <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A04081AB4AD@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com> <20E112E82D30472AA48E653041BC0A78@china.huawei.com>, <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A04081AB5BE@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com> <5F7BCCF5541B7444830A2288ABBEBC96218CFC7599@FRMRSSXCHMBSD2.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com> <50658AA6.5090200@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <50658AA6.5090200@alvestrand.no>
Accept-Language: de-DE, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: de-DE, en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.13
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [xrblock] FW: I-DAction:draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-stats-registry-00.txt
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: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 23:51:14 -0000

Harald,

just to double check:

> (For reference, the WebRTC codebase seems to decode block type 7 and no 
other block type....)

BT=7 would be the "VoIP Metrics Report Block" (RFC 3611).

Whereas BT=6 would be the "Statistics Summary Report Block", related also to some improved SR/BR metric.

Regards,
Albrecht

-----Original Message-----
From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Harald Alvestrand
Sent: Freitag, 28. September 2012 13:32
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] [xrblock] FW: I-DAction:draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-stats-registry-00.txt

On 09/27/2012 01:20 AM, Schwarz, Albrecht (Albrecht) wrote:
>> I am happy to see my comments being forwarded to rtcweb@ietf.org if
> they
>> are interested and want to more input from XRBLOCK WG. However I am
> not
>> sure how much of their work is related to XRBLOCK work? Do they only
>> look for some basic metrics obtained from SR/RR. But I agree with you
>> consistency between the metrics used by RTCP XR and RTCWEB is a good
>> thing.
> The work on "rtcweb-stats" is related to XRBLOCK in my opinon.
> At least the "basic metrics from SR/RR" with respect to packet loss are controversial and could be misleading, and should be replaced by correspondent XR performance metric types.
> The deficiency of some of these basic metrics was one reason to start work on extension reports (XR, and former HR).
Indeed. The reason I started the document with packet counts and packet 
loss from SR/RR was that I thought these would be uncontroversial and 
unambiguous; I'm seeking guidance from XR people on what other metrics 
are well known enough - and implemented widely enough - that it makes 
sense to include them.

(For reference, the WebRTC codebase seems to decode block type 7 and no 
other block type....)

_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
rtcweb@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email