IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Comment on Straw Poll replies

"DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> Tue, 14 January 2014 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 362031AE15E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:35:27 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id aDu8mL91mFH7 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:35:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: from hoemail1.alcatel.com (hoemail1.alcatel.com [192.160.6.148]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA1741AE153 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 09:35:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (h135-239-2-122.lucent.com [135.239.2.122]) by hoemail1.alcatel.com (8.13.8/IER-o) with ESMTP id s0EHZB4C028606 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 11:35:13 -0600 (CST)
Received: from FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (fr712wxchhub03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com [135.239.2.74]) by fr711usmtp1.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com (GMO) with ESMTP id s0EHZ81Z012128 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:35:11 +0100
Received: from FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([169.254.7.26]) by FR712WXCHHUB03.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.239.2.74]) with mapi id 14.02.0247.003; Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:35:08 +0100
From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>, Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Comment on Straw Poll replies
Thread-Index: AQHPESUbeWhlJf1Mx0iv0rI5UTUNqZqEX8uAgAABMACAABEB4A==
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:35:07 +0000
Message-ID: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B11510C@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <CAHp8n2kq+_uG=9XwoAGtRgqYU2Asc2Fv6RZ0aCW6cJi-LnhD+A@mail.gmail.com> <10390_1389365676_52D009AC_10390_2407_1_2842AD9A45C83B44B57635FD4831E60A06CBE540@PEXCVZYM14.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <52D0222F.4010006@bbs.darktech.org> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B112238@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <CAHp8n2=m3i77SNPZWmJchqVdg1c2WEJCt5g-pFRfmeWA2yV5xw@mail.gmail.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B114B2D@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <2521C21F-8D06-4AB1-916A-B1861FB38F2A@phonefromhere.com> <CEFAABA0.3F7F7%stewe@stewe.org> <34D5CA53-067D-4AE5-A784-1DADCF45BB26@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <34D5CA53-067D-4AE5-A784-1DADCF45BB26@phonefromhere.com>
Accept-Language: en-GB, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [135.239.27.40]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Comment on Straw Poll replies
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 14 Jan 2014 17:35:27 -0000

IMS VoLTE has them both in the same SDP session.

Not familiar enough with RCS to comment.

Regards

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Panton [mailto:tim@phonefromhere.com] 
> Sent: 14 January 2014 17:00
> To: Stephan Wenger
> Cc: DRAGE, Keith (Keith); rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Comment on Straw Poll replies
> 
> 
> On 14 Jan 2014, at 16:55, Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > On 1/14/14, 4:35, "Tim Panton" <tim@phonefromhere.com> wrote:
> > 
> >> 
> >> On 14 Jan 2014, at 10:22, DRAGE, Keith (Keith) 
> >> <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> In those terms, I do not believe that is what they were 
> showing, at 
> >>> least according to the reports I have seen.
> >>> 
> >>> Further, apart from any processing power, the critical 
> issue is the 
> >>> delay involved in any conversion, and I have no figures for that 
> >>> from this demonstration, and I suspect you do not either. 
> Given that 
> >>> you must receive frames to do the conversion, my belief 
> is that we 
> >>> will still be talking both decode and encode delay at the 
> conversion 
> >>> point of the order of 60 - 70 ms, whatever mechanism is 
> used. That 
> >>> is a significant take from the limits specified in ITU 
> Recommendation G.114.
> >>> 
> >>> Regards
> >>> 
> >>> Keith
> >>> 
> >> 
> >> My experience of the existing mass h264 deployments in the mobile 
> >> space is that they like to split the the audio and video 
> media paths. 
> >> (You'd need to do this in any gateway to these legacy systems).
> >> This means that they can get out of sync. This would be 
> made worse by 
> >> transcoding the video leg.
> > 
> > RTP is designed to take care of this.
> 
> 
> Not if audio and video are on separate calls - which seems to 
> be what RCS/joyn expects.
> 
> T.
> 
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email