IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [video-codec] draft-filippov-netvc-requirements-01

Thomas Daede <tdaede@mozilla.com> Tue, 21 July 2015 16:21 UTC

Return-Path: <tdaede@mozilla.com>
X-Original-To: video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99E621A1BC6 for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:21:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 eRpaL2E7JwJs for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com [209.85.212.178]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4AF021A0AF8 for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:21:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wicmv11 with SMTP id mv11so46400395wic.0 for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:21:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=5h/G6KOjgbFKdNLMlaB0TX1Yyd9CcDzw8I3/e8z1Ir4=; b=kUdYjH2uZlp7X0NPflgdAVHctvBJYklN2u5POwqirI3rIYt6ckS4aqLp0/xsUkiJft jZJOsQD56ePtkMMZNADU9YNZ/DXSOyS7ISP/ynegNpDJsuFVcdbzS+YcQkVfBagDbOy0 q0Sahjcpiq0dlZAz06Gdw+3X7vC/hRotx7DI2HLyQ5dPFAbQZkkkvkx9g5N5XabenVjF tKvErr99+Rh4d1Ab8PegsE8PwCft8dh+GwC/AcPTqYXXab82Rh5ll+YO4DRDdcQ5ddKn zPaDhFg0PNwt5CquBhwqor7CrpAMhdFHrfe3NxebSuE5oiG9QFiSsZjcy3a3+RdZJky4 LY9Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlVJT4AqNuUg6Hv0Z9gP2xuoFAWRL347cN4hQ8hA/DKrOD276/NgvZhtQdu5Xr0qj/9ghAI
X-Received: by 10.180.94.168 with SMTP id dd8mr33370080wib.76.1437495663999; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ?IPv6:2001:67c:370:168:7e7a:91ff:fe9e:8126? ([2001:67c:370:168:7e7a:91ff:fe9e:8126]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d17sm37756473wjs.32.2015.07.21.09.21.03 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:21:03 -0700 (PDT)
To: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>, "video-codec@ietf.org" <video-codec@ietf.org>
References: <32AA73C5-0D17-4ECE-A02D-041C5147D9E5@cisco.com> <55AE60D0.3040201@mozilla.com> <29BD22C6-8790-451B-B754-ED55D2F41C90@cisco.com> <55AE6F5C.8000805@mozilla.com> <48DABB00-F56E-4725-B4FB-F0F91857CA1A@cisco.com>
From: Thomas Daede <tdaede@mozilla.com>
Message-ID: <55AE716E.8090305@mozilla.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 18:21:02 +0200
User-Agent: http://a.pomf.se/cszdno.opus
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <48DABB00-F56E-4725-B4FB-F0F91857CA1A@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/video-codec/3SqoKaSYzMryCTv8bY4qrZkrXLA>
Subject: Re: [video-codec] draft-filippov-netvc-requirements-01
X-BeenThere: video-codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Video codec BoF discussion list <video-codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/video-codec>, <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/video-codec/>
List-Post: <mailto:video-codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec>, <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 16:21:07 -0000

On 07/21/2015 06:14 PM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote:

>>>> - All of the use cases should specify either a high latency or low
>>>> latency requirement.
>>> And where is the borderline?
>>
>> What is a borderline use case? I would much rather keep the number of
>> configurations as low as possible.
> 
> I mean what is low latency vs high latency. And who decides that?
> 

It is defined in draft-daede-netvc-testing-01 [1]. And some of the
definition should probably be moved into the requirements draft, though
individual codec parameters still belong in the testing draft.

https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-daede-netvc-testing/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email