Re: [rtcweb] RTP Usage: Is RTP Retransmission REQUIRED or RECOMMENDED

["Roy, Radhika R CIV (US)" <[e-mail]>]

If this is your personal opinion, it is OK.

However, like many others, I would not recommend this with this kind of blanket statement.

It is at all recommended, then the special circumstances under all those technical assumptions need to be noted. In this way, the RTP retransmission users will take their technically informed decisions and not to blame when perils occur.

BR/Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: Roni Even [mailto:[e-mail]] 
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 10:57 AM
To: Roy, Radhika R CIV (US)
Cc: 'Magnus Westerlund'; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [rtcweb] RTP Usage: Is RTP Retransmission REQUIRED or RECOMMENDED

Hi,
The question was asked if it should be required or recommended. From these two I choose  recommended which is less strong even though I think that MAY will be better for using retransmission in conversional applications.
Roni

-----Original Message-----
From: Roy, Radhika R CIV (US) [mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent: 28 June, 2012 12:39 PM
To: Roni Even
Cc: 'Magnus Westerlund'; [e-mail]
Subject: RE: [rtcweb] RTP Usage: Is RTP Retransmission REQUIRED or RECOMMENDED

Hi, Roni:

Why do you want to recommend something that cannot be generalized conversional applications just because of more tools can be sold in the market?

No one is objecting to generalize the RTP retransmissions for the content delivery or streaming applications.

BR/Radhika

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Roni Even
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 3:25 AM
To: 'Magnus Westerlund'; [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTP Usage: Is RTP Retransmission REQUIRED or RECOMMENDED

Hi,
My view is that retransmission have great value for content delivery or streaming applications, when the communication is unidirectional. 
For conversional applications like we are defining in RTCweb, retransmission has the lower value comparing to other loss recovery options like FEC or receiver based recovery. The latency involved with the extra roundtrips makes it not effective comparing to typical jitter buffer sizes at the receiver, note that receiver will take correction actions even for late arrival and will not try to dynamically change the jitter buffer to a larger size beyond the maximum threshold of end to end delay. 
 If we look at the typical behavior of conversional applications, they will add to audio on the sender side FEC or even send the media twice is subsequent packets encoded in different encoders,( of course for the conversation itself the listener can always ask the talker to repeat since he did not hear it clearly). On the video FEC and receiver side recovery like motion estimation is common.
I propose that retransmission can be recommended and in my view for conversional usage even this is strong.

Roni

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Magnus Westerlund
Sent: 27 June, 2012 9:37 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [rtcweb] RTP Usage: Is RTP Retransmission REQUIRED or RECOMMENDED

WG,

We had a discussion at the interim if RTP Retransmission is to be considered REQUIRED or RECOMMENDED to implement. I would like to see if we can first have some discussion on this topic before moving on to see if we can get a consensus here on the mailing list.

Please provide your views on this topic.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund
(As Chair and document editor)


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  [phone]
Färögatan 6                | Mobile [phone]
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [e-mail]
----------------------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb