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

[Shida Schubert <[e-mail]>]

Hi;

 So looking at 

 http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/errata-processing.html <http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/errata-processing.html>

 My feeling is that we can probably do this as an errata. 

 I do think some of the people contributing to this WG who have experience chairing long running WG where errata/bis are common can probably give better guidance though. 

 Thanks

 Shida as co-chair

> On Mar 26, 2015, at 9:05 AM, Huangyihong (Rachel) <[e-mail]> wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
> I prefer 6.7 too. As for the issue raised by Varun, will it be a technical errata to RFC7003 or a new draft to define the missing metric?
> 
> BR,
> Rachel
> 
> -----邮件原件-----
> 发件人: xrblock [mailto:[e-mail]] 代表 Varun Singh
> 发送时间: 2015年3月26日 23:45
> 收件人: Roni Even
> 抄送: [e-mail]
> 主题: Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics-01.txt
> 
> Thank you Roni for the review and  feedback.
> 
> I too prefer 6.7, however, 6.8 has gapDiscardRate and gapLossRate in addition to burstDiscardRate and burstLossRate, which cannot be derived by the raw information in 6.7.
> Would we be unhappy if the gapRates were removed or missing?
> 
> The other minor issue/bug within 6.7, that there is no definition for burstDiscardCount in any XR draft. This would require a new draft and can be proceeded in parallel.
> 
> 
> -Varun
> 
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:14 AM, Roni Even <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Hi Varun,
>> 
>> I think that we can keep 6.7 and remove 6.8. Having the actual numbers 
>> allows for calculating rate and other statistics, so I find it more 
>> useful
>> 
>> Roni Even
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> From: xrblock [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Varun 
>> Singh
>> Sent: 28 February, 2015 10:48 PM
>> To: [e-mail]
>> Subject: Re: [xrblock] I-D Action:
>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics-01.txt
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> The -01 draft incorporates the changes discussed at IETF 91.
>> - new registry defined for WebRTC Statistics API
>> - added the SR and RR metrics, which were earlier in 
>> draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-stats-registry
>> - changed the TitleCased identifiers to camelCase, to keep consistency 
>> with the W3C document.
>> 
>> OPEN ISSUE (burst metrics):
>> The document currently defines two sets of burst metrics
>> - Section 6.7: Reports cumulative packets in a burst and the 
>> corresponding burst counts.
>> - Section 6.8.: Reports the average fraction of packets lost in a burst/gap.
>> 
>> From section 6.7, we can infer the average burst of packet 
>> loss/discards by dividing the total_packets_lost_in_burst/burst_count.
>>> From section 6.8, we can infer the impact of the burst packet loss, 
>>> i.e.,
>> total_burst_loss/totel_expected_packets/burst_count
>> 
>> Do we keep both? or pick one?
>> 
>> Thoughts and comments on the open issue and the document in general 
>> are appreciated.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> Varun (on behalf of the authors)
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 7:22 PM, <[e-mail]> 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 : Considerations for Selecting RTCP Extended Report (XR) 
>>> Metrics for the WebRTC Statistics API Authors : Varun Singh Rachel 
>>> Huang Roni Even Dan Romascanu Lingli Deng Filename : 
>>> draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics-01.txt
>>> Pages : 17
>>> Date : 2015-02-28
>>> 
>>> Abstract:
>>> This document describes monitoring features related to media streams 
>>> in Web real-time communication (WebRTC). It provides a list of RTCP 
>>> Sender Report, Receiver Report and Extended Report metrics, which may 
>>> need to be supported by RTP implementations in some diverse 
>>> environments. It also defines a new IANA registry, a list of 
>>> identifiers for the WebRTC's statistics API. These identifiers are a 
>>> set of RTCP SR, RR, and XR metrics related to the transport of 
>>> multimedia flows.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
>>> 
>>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-me
>>> trics/
>>> 
>>> There's also a htmlized version available at:
>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics-
>>> 01
>>> 
>>> A diff from the previous version is available at:
>>> 
>>> http://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-me
>>> trics-01
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of 
>>> submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at 
>>> tools.ietf.org.
>>> 
>>> Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
>>> ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> xrblock mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock
>> 
>> --
>> http://www.callstats.io
> 
> 
> 
> --
> http://www.callstats.io
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xrblock mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock
> _______________________________________________
> xrblock mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock