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

[Cameron Byrne <[e-mail]>]

On Jun 28, 2012 6:57 AM, "Roni Even" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
> 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
>

+1 for MAY.

CB

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