Re: [tcmtf] Using the concept of "latency budget" for TCM-TF

On 2/18/2014 12:45 AM, Jose Saldana wrote:
> Sure.
>
> We have studied the effect of the added delay (and jitter) on different
> services: VoIP, games. We have even used subjective quality estimators in
> order to see the degradation as a function of the period.

There's several decades of work - much of this ongoing - studying this 
effect. You might look into it and cite some of the existing understanding.

> We can include some ideas in the second draft (Delay Limits and Multiplexing
> Policies to be employed with Tunneling Compressed Multiplexed Traffic Flows,
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-suznjevic-tsvwg-mtd-tcmtf/

AFAICT, this implies you assume that the HCI latency budget is yours to 
consume; you need to account for the rest of the system.

Joe

>
> Thanks,
>
> Jose
> PS:
> A paper about the effect on VoIP:
>
> Jose Saldana, Julian Fernandez-Navajas, Jose Ruiz-Mas, Jenifer Murillo,
> Eduardo Viruete, Jose I. Aznar, "Evaluating the Influence of Multiplexing
> Schemes and Buffer Implementation on Perceived VoIP Conversation Quality,"
> Computer Networks (Elsevier), Volume 56, Issue 7, Pages 1893-1919, May 2012.
> doi 10.1016/j.comnet.2012.02.004
>
>
> Another one about the effect on a game:
>
> Jose Saldana, Julian Fernandez-Navajas, Jose Ruiz-Mas, Eduardo Viruete
> Navarro, Luis Casadesus, "Online FPS Games: Effect of Router Buffer and
> Multiplexing Techniques on Subjective Quality Estimators," Multimedia Tools
> and Applications, Springer. doi 10.1007/s11042-012-1309-4
>
>> -----Mensaje original-----
>> De: Luigi Iannone [mailto:ggx@gigix.net]
>> Enviado el: lunes, 10 de febrero de 2014 16:38
>> Para: Jose Saldana
>> CC: Joe Touch; tcmtf@ietf.org; tsv-area@ietf.org
>> Asunto: Re: [tcmtf] Using the concept of "latency budget" for TCM-TF
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 7 Feb. 2014, at 09:44 , Jose Saldana <jsaldana@unizar.es> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>>
>>> The only question that is different in TCM-TF is that we have to
>>> multiplex packets, so for certain services we must define a
>>> "multiplexing period" (the added delay is half the period in average).
>>> In this case, we can control this portion of the added delay. We can
>>> tune the period if the latency gets modified.
>>>
>>
>> Will this be documented in the documents produced by the WG?
>>
>> I mean, it would be useful to have something that describes performances
>> with different multiplexing period and may be a recommended setup
>> depending of the traffic type (e.g. gaming vs voip).
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> L.
>>
>>
>>
>>> This is why I thought that was interesting here: we can control and
>>> tune a part of the latency in this case.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Joe
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Jose
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> tcmtf mailing list
>>> tcmtf@ietf.org
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tcmtf
>>
>