IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

"Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)" <mzanaty@cisco.com> Tue, 21 July 2015 16:36 UTC

Return-Path: <mzanaty@cisco.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 E55D21A9061 for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:36:30 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.511
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.511 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 lA_uUqwrMZxg for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com [173.37.86.79]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6F4FE1A8A39 for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 09:36:29 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1499; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1437496589; x=1438706189; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=O1IiG23Yz+gIARb71AI5yYi83UPUV/P8OTx0eADLFYM=; b=MU/rYydo7Adq3sspQl4Un2FL2Dh0FShblazjLL0L62CAIacbap0Ssuz4 SW7ClcPhDtw/axAUYD4ODCX9518KB6Yxbsvp8lcNGTVDdK9G8XgWkgy8i c7WYgPWMYbtcEnXbBdvRSZVyc8zcHfNe/FCDzPuyf2uJ62CJ9pMmiUTmy k=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0AEBQAMdK5V/4oNJK1cgxNUWg+8GYFrCoYBAoE7ORMBAQEBAQEBgQqEIwEBAQMBAQEBNzQLBQcEAgEIEQMBAgEeECcLHQgCBA4FiCYIDcwHAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBEwSLTIRTMwcGgxGBFAWUUwGEdIc1mQ4mg3xvgksBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.15,517,1432598400"; d="scan'208";a="11750003"
Received: from alln-core-5.cisco.com ([173.36.13.138]) by rcdn-iport-8.cisco.com with ESMTP; 21 Jul 2015 16:36:28 +0000
Received: from xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com (xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com [173.37.183.88]) by alln-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id t6LGaS0n031627 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 21 Jul 2015 16:36:28 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([169.254.4.112]) by xhc-rcd-x14.cisco.com ([173.37.183.88]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 21 Jul 2015 11:36:28 -0500
From: "Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)" <mzanaty@cisco.com>
To: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [video-codec] draft-filippov-netvc-requirements-01
Thread-Index: AQHQw8CyW0GCvpXJZECxIZTezzBngJ3mWvkAgAApqwD//+esAIAAIksA///gLQCAACOdAP//jOHb
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 2015 16:36:27 +0000
Message-ID: <2DECBC26-B567-420F-93EC-447E9B61169E@cisco.com>
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> <55AE716E.8090305@mozilla.com>, <8E255F2B-E72A-4634-A6AB-335C77BE2448@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <8E255F2B-E72A-4634-A6AB-335C77BE2448@cisco.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/video-codec/4J28n7s5yDwdjJrhTvDAEnkSCK0>
Cc: "video-codec@ietf.org" <video-codec@ietf.org>, Thomas Daede <tdaede@mozilla.com>
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 16:36:31 -0000

300 ms (* bitrate) refers to the rate control buffer not coding latency. 

I think the testing draft should define low latency as zero frame delay, i.e. no reordering. The high latency condition can be unrestricted. 

Mo (as individual)

On Jul 21, 2015, at 6:28 PM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) <abegen@cisco.com> wrote:






-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Daede
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 6:21 PM
To: "Ali C. Begen", "video-codec@ietf.org"
Subject: Re: [video-codec] draft-filippov-netvc-requirements-01

> 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/

I searched for latency and delay, nothing showed up. The only time related number seems to be 300ms in section 5.3.
_______________________________________________
video-codec mailing list
video-codec@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email