[xrblock] PM Dir review of Discard RLE Draft

Varun Singh <vsingh.ietf@gmail.com> Sun, 21 July 2013 09:00 UTC

Return-Path: <vsingh.ietf@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E7AE21E808C for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:00:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CIqtbIwLf-Qz for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x22a.google.com (mail-ie0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::22a]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A876521E8087 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id e11so13106422iej.29 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=IMlML5+qZkyUQRiDiiowlreZVPJZQwlMJhlBjIxD7A4=; b=iAtL5o8SZNLtNDDIDdCjhelpOEIy9TXp2zN98sePoPHgTeMAufyTzk2GywXXQwFfyk zDOI9EFvDceWzne8LQ6P+xCzV3EfLRE3dGR5Mwd+KxMqInc2kiMqOvD/KJU+jq+MEnFF XNjAAJn506jaOXIxobYheLv70L+RerFAf9DDohj6TmaNMbWnwQFHF1Ysf7xgh4L+RqMy iNuP1CBUxU5HzBMzt3Q/Vi4NMW04H5kjFTPX+Rm4QXUbEQ5MPqfjPNJPIFNp9SqD2gxT 3dHffchQCLEn/24lDEf9ZYWRb9wepw3wO95erbQJlvRZDLKlE8ZFoLaYh43W+2vJZNIw hxSQ==
X-Received: by 10.42.232.142 with SMTP id ju14mr14651928icb.108.1374397236164; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:00:36 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.50.73.165 with HTTP; Sun, 21 Jul 2013 02:00:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Varun Singh <vsingh.ietf@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 12:00:16 +0300
Message-ID: <CAEbPqrzwkPzH4oBBxm7O+pDts=jYQA0gbxaksvBXKCqbCodO3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: "xrblock@ietf.org" <xrblock@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bacb2040b669a04e201cbd2"
Subject: [xrblock] PM Dir review of Discard RLE Draft
X-BeenThere: xrblock@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Metric Blocks for use with RTCP's Extended Report Framework working group discussion list <xrblock.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/xrblock>, <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/xrblock>
List-Post: <mailto:xrblock@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock>, <mailto:xrblock-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 21 Jul 2013 09:00:37 -0000

Discard RLE [1] was recently reviewed by PM Dir [2], some issues were
raised, which require input from the WG.

PM Dir:
The main concern is that the draft contains two reporting blocks:
Discard RLE and Bytes discarded. First, the current title just mentions
the Discard RLE and not discarded bytes. Second, the discarded bytes
may be a better fit with discarded packets draft.

The question in this case is, which choice does the WG prefer?
1. update the title of the discarded RLE draft and add the appropriate
RFC6390 templates.

2. Merge the discarded bytes with the discarded packets, however,
the discarded packets draft is in RFC editor queue.

3. Make a new draft for discarded bytes?


Cheers,
Varun


[1]
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-rle-metrics-06
[2] http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/pm-dir/current/msg00571.html