Re: [rtcweb] [Suspected Junk Mail] Endpoints that don't support RTCP

[Paul Kyzivat <[e-mail]>]

On 4/23/15 9:47 AM, John Leslie wrote:

>     Very roughly speaking, a WebRTC application could add 20% FEC bits
> to compensate for 20% packet loss. This _is_ a step down the road to
> congestion collapse; but it's not -- of itself -- a _big_ step. Its
> effect upon competing TCP traffic _is_ substantial (and there may be
> political considerations saying we have to reduce that effect).
>
>     "Circuit-breaker" is not a terribly effective way to do that --
> especially when the WebRTC application can simply start another call.

I'm just a kibitzer here, but IIUC CB indeed doesn't *intend* to do 
that. Rather, its goal is to motivate the application to do something 
better, so that the CB isn't triggered.

	Thanks,
	Paul