Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-concsec-01.txt

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Tue, 16 October 2012 05:50 UTC

Return-Path: <bill.wu@huawei.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 A79C321F87E9 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Oct 2012 22:50:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.83
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.83 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.016, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D3rN+6JR4OMK for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Oct 2012 22:50:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 98D6721F87E7 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Oct 2012 22:50:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml203-edg.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg01-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id ALR01929; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:50:13 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML402-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:49:26 +0100
Received: from SZXEML447-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.185) by lhreml402-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.241) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 06:50:11 +0100
Received: from w53375 (10.138.41.149) by szxeml447-hub.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.185) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:50:08 +0800
Message-ID: <361C9244AC434DB8BA8F9BB74E301648@china.huawei.com>
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: xrblock@ietf.org
References: <20121016035011.16635.71635.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 13:50:07 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-Originating-IP: [10.138.41.149]
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-concsec-01.txt
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: Tue, 16 Oct 2012 05:50:15 -0000

On 16 October , 2012 11:50 AM, Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote:

> 
> A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
> This draft is a work item of the Metric Blocks for use with RTCP's Extended Report Framework Working Group of the IETF.
> 
> Title           : RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report (XR) Block for Concealed Seconds metric Reporting
> Author(s)       : Alan Clark
>                          Glen Zorn
>                          Claire Bi
>                          Qin Wu
> Filename        : draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-concsec-01.txt
> Pages           : 19
> Date            : 2012-10-15
> 
> Abstract:
>   This document defines an RTP Control Protocol(RTCP) Extended Report
>   (XR) Block that allows the reporting of Concealed Seconds metrics
>   primarily for audio applications of RTP.
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-concsec

[Qin]: This update incorporated some comments that are applied to PDV and Delay drafts.
One open issue remains, i.e., what change are needed to to support video loss concealment.