Re: [Rum] Minimum Technical Features in RUM?

"DOLLY, MARTIN C" <md3135@att.com> Wed, 27 March 2019 15:51 UTC

Return-Path: <md3135@att.com>
X-Original-To: rum@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rum@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63D2A12027E for <rum@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 08:51:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.75
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.75 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, KHOP_DYNAMIC=0.85, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
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 zOp2E--9_nkK for <rum@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 08:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com [67.231.149.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4AE41202CC for <rum@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 08:51:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from pps.filterd (m0053301.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id x2RFmUUM000957; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:51:51 -0400
Received: from alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (sbcsmtp7.sbc.com [144.160.229.24]) by mx0a-00191d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 2rgbay9pcp-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:51:51 -0400
Received: from enaf.aldc.att.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x2RFpmKF007954; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:51:50 -0400
Received: from zlp27126.vci.att.com (zlp27126.vci.att.com [135.66.87.47]) by alpi155.enaf.aldc.att.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id x2RFphtq007688; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:51:44 -0400
Received: from zlp27126.vci.att.com (zlp27126.vci.att.com [127.0.0.1]) by zlp27126.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTP id DF5124030707; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:51:43 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from MISOUT7MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com (unknown [130.9.129.145]) by zlp27126.vci.att.com (Service) with ESMTPS id CA55B403070B; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:51:43 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from MISOUT7MSGUSRDB.ITServices.sbc.com ([169.254.2.222]) by MISOUT7MSGHUBAA.ITServices.sbc.com ([130.9.129.145]) with mapi id 14.03.0439.000; Wed, 27 Mar 2019 11:51:42 -0400
From: "DOLLY, MARTIN C" <md3135@att.com>
To: Chris Wendt <chris-ietf@chriswendt.net>
CC: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>, "rum@ietf.org" <rum@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [Rum] Minimum Technical Features in RUM?
Thread-Index: AQHU5LC6WCVHY4/xBEud8nd0enOB+qYf3aKA///C718=
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:51:42 +0000
Message-ID: <933CB03A-1818-4C45-85D8-54F0C440481E@att.com>
References: <2a40ff1d-45d0-bc2c-eeee-5a28b5bcd3fd@nostrum.com> <21080EDE-D5F5-48EF-9CFA-C26B992E65BA@standardstrack.com>, <421FADC7-8C6A-436E-A792-1D5676A689E7@chriswendt.net>
In-Reply-To: <421FADC7-8C6A-436E-A792-1D5676A689E7@chriswendt.net>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:, , definitions=2019-03-27_10:, , signatures=0
X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_policy_notspam policy=outbound_policy score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1011 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=675 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1810050000 definitions=main-1903270110
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rum/hJFKS9fUvE5xm9BzB5ifdxxDZxI>
Subject: Re: [Rum] Minimum Technical Features in RUM?
X-BeenThere: rum@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Relay User Machine <rum.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rum>, <mailto:rum-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rum/>
List-Post: <mailto:rum@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rum-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rum>, <mailto:rum-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2019 15:51:55 -0000

I agree with Chris
Or 
We could the debate the codec for a few years

Martin C Dolly
AT&T
Lead Member of Technical Staff
Government & Services Standards
+1 609 903 3360

> On Mar 27, 2019, at 11:30 AM, Chris Wendt <chris-ietf@chriswendt.net> wrote:
> 
> I think we can hopefully point to the webrtc video specs which I believe at least define minimums in terms of MTI codecs, resolutions, etc.  Maybe they will be updated over time, but we are getting to the point that having beyond a 4k video stream for your video call may produce diminishing returns.  Some would argue 1080p/30 or 60 is already at that point.  So while, you never say never, i believe it’s pretty safe to say for the kind of video we are addressing in RUM, there is soon going to be some pretty comfortable stability for a while.  I don’t think that’s a controversial statement but maybe could be proven wrong :)
> 
>> On Mar 27, 2019, at 4:20 PM, Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Is there a compelling reason to go here?
>> 
>>> On Mar 27, 2019, at 9:49 AM, A. Jean Mahoney <mahoney@nostrum.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Brian asked if the draft was missing anything. If there is a required minimum frame rate, it would need to be captured in the draft. Adam said that once the WG started importing WebRTC information into the draft, they would find things to add. FEC for instance. Adam said he could be the WG contact for WebRTC information.
>> 
>> I agree: it would be nice to say, “The device MUST be usable.” However, doesn’t the definition of usable change over time? Looking at my real-time messaging work in the late 1990’s, we might have said something like, “You MUST have an ultra high-speed, 384kb/s connection.” Wouldn’t that look quaint today.
>> 
>> In other words, talking about FEC, minimum frame rates, minimum display sizes, etc. is IMHO is way out of scope. If someone chose to build a device that was unusable, that is not our problem. They would find adoption to be about 0%. Conversely, if someone is seriously building a device that meets RUM, they would presumably check to see what would be viable in the (then current) market.
>> -- 
>> Rum mailing list
>> Rum@ietf.org
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_rum&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=G9v8uCSSQhCmpw7ItG0r2g&m=S90utjdt6fldt2pc4TJiVpuj-Hjl-_fSznBcu_OsSaw&s=hnoq2Q6LRiypWSPzTGe5CLJWdlM_T-rZL3DtGbZdjv4&e=
> 
> -- 
> Rum mailing list
> Rum@ietf.org
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_rum&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=G9v8uCSSQhCmpw7ItG0r2g&m=S90utjdt6fldt2pc4TJiVpuj-Hjl-_fSznBcu_OsSaw&s=hnoq2Q6LRiypWSPzTGe5CLJWdlM_T-rZL3DtGbZdjv4&e=