Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics-01.txt
Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com> Sat, 28 March 2015 17:53 UTC
Return-Path: <shida@ntt-at.com>
X-Original-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1BA31A8A48 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 10:53:10 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.451
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.451 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_BRBL_LASTEXT=1.449, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 iQsfenmluSH6 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 10:53:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from gator4135.hostgator.com (gator4135.hostgator.com [192.185.4.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C5E471A8A43 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 10:53:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [71.204.141.163] (port=44838 helo=[10.0.1.29]) by gator4135.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <shida@ntt-at.com>) id 1Ybuuv-0003UQ-IH; Sat, 28 Mar 2015 12:53:05 -0500
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_12BDA38D-0FD6-46BC-9A71-7BABD69D05A8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.2 \(2070.6\))
From: Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com>
In-Reply-To: <51E6A56BD6A85142B9D172C87FC3ABBB863097D9@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 10:53:07 -0700
Message-Id: <96D67F82-6E42-4057-87DA-C1C0E34AFA85@ntt-at.com>
References: <20150228172233.11376.10175.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAEbPqrwxzBk4kr+XgFwdBOUDaiPyLz--22T3kx-uR8WX7JHsCw@mail.gmail.com> <005f01d067cf$36e1e710$a4a5b530$@gmail.com> <CAEbPqrwR10MbKx3badtsVHaEiJZ1EarBaz633z_nQEXawE5CAQ@mail.gmail.com> <51E6A56BD6A85142B9D172C87FC3ABBB863097D9@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
To: "Huangyihong (Rachel)" <rachel.huang@huawei.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.2070.6)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator4135.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ntt-at.com
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source-IP: 71.204.141.163
X-Exim-ID: 1Ybuuv-0003UQ-IH
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: ([10.0.1.29]) [71.204.141.163]:44838
X-Source-Auth: shida@agnada.com
X-Email-Count: 2
X-Source-Cap: c3NoaWRhO3NzaGlkYTtnYXRvcjQxMzUuaG9zdGdhdG9yLmNvbQ==
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xrblock/CrNy3yK3nGOy93XUIZub6OFJA8I>
Cc: xrblock <xrblock@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-rtcp-xr-metrics-01.txt
X-BeenThere: xrblock@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sat, 28 Mar 2015 17:53:10 -0000
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) <rachel.huang@huawei.com> 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:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Varun Singh > 发送时间: 2015年3月26日 23:45 > 收件人: Roni Even > 抄送: xrblock@ietf.org > 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 <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> 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:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Varun >> Singh >> Sent: 28 February, 2015 10:48 PM >> To: xrblock@ietf.org >> 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, <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 : 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 >>> xrblock@ietf.org >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock >> >> -- >> http://www.callstats.io > > > > -- > http://www.callstats.io > > _______________________________________________ > xrblock mailing list > xrblock@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock > _______________________________________________ > xrblock mailing list > xrblock@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Shida Schubert
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Roni Even
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Varun Singh
- [xrblock] 答复: I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Huangyihong (Rachel)
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Shida Schubert
- [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcweb-r… internet-drafts
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Varun Singh
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Varun Singh
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Varun Singh
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
- Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcw… Shida Schubert