Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-05.txt

"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Thu, 26 July 2012 05:11 UTC

Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@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 787B121F84D2 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:11:23 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.211
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.211 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.212, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_46=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 B-p1DZ5fB9Sr for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:11:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com (mail-wi0-f178.google.com [209.85.212.178]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30E4F21F8449 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:11:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wibhr14 with SMTP id hr14so1154271wib.13 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:11:17 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:x-mailer :thread-index:content-language; bh=Rq3QejySCSuU7T7dyNN+5g9UVewj0TphHLjZP508S18=; b=Vkpanbv/WP9RObKWuwrdhbdwSXz5pKbjsbJxxdw37qZ0kbKriNO2MWIP9+jCxzPvL0 91xGP5G+c20CympT3iVmzWN99idGKcOXOte27+WZEPTtZErg/rWTIcVgp7W5BFamQNtp z4bJn3D+FljTMrnZlq43W1wLD0gw5POyyGWlSL4Mzh5uUMJkL85//lJOXhin9EirjUtg hL7iLPNr7F03/J3uO2s95xPki11rIB9K3pK0N4tz0E8qmLCLKlZW/fmhwVS+qjjJlZbx qlctL2iKWg0EdduW9oUJ6Ie6LqFZgy+gN04Xq4Hs1kvPnG8JUT8FnEj/d34RBUhrcpVo p7bw==
Received: by 10.180.92.7 with SMTP id ci7mr12551788wib.1.1343279477275; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:11:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from RoniE (bzq-79-176-214-12.red.bezeqint.net. [79.176.214.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id el6sm6292603wib.8.2012.07.25.22.11.15 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 25 Jul 2012 22:11:16 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: 'Qin Wu' <bill.wu@huawei.com>, "'Romascanu, Dan (Dan)'" <dromasca@avaya.com>, 'Colin Perkins' <csp@csperkins.org>
References: <D8C720B9E77243D0BE6C58CA45A2A735@china.huawei.com><88D9BF6DCE6840D3B896E0C0445265B9@china.huawei.com> <B0CC02A1-26A5-4089-A2C8-BDFEBAD941BE@csperkins.org> <EDC652A26FB23C4EB6384A4584434A0407DBE958@307622ANEX5.global.avaya.com> <3957D425E6DA4354A8512A91E1EBE282@china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <3957D425E6DA4354A8512A91E1EBE282@china.huawei.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 08:10:13 +0200
Message-ID: <001b01cd6af5$53918570$fab49050$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQGcYOilKMUthJV0rbVCpJCHa4FVPgIVGMkDAjeUyP0BN7lziwImSI4Tl1/TKrA=
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: xrblock@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-05.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: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 05:11:23 -0000

Hi,
I think it will be good to add it as an informative reference.
Roni

-----Original Message-----
From: xrblock-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Qin Wu
Sent: 26 July, 2012 3:02 AM
To: Romascanu, Dan (Dan); Colin Perkins
Cc: xrblock@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-05.txt

I tend to agree, and I prefer to put it as one informative reference.
Otherwise I am wondering why should this draft support duplication packet
discard?

Regards!
-Qin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <dromasca@avaya.com>
To: "Colin Perkins" <csp@csperkins.org>; "Qin Wu" <bill.wu@huawei.com>
Cc: <xrblock@ietf.org>
Sent: Thursday, July 26, 2012 8:26 AM
Subject: RE: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-05.txt


+1

... but (question to Colin) - do you believe that this reference needs
to be Normative? 

Dan




> -----Original Message-----
> From: xrblock-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] On
> Behalf Of Colin Perkins
> Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 10:59 AM
> To: Qin Wu
> Cc: xrblock@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [xrblock] I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-
> 05.txt
> 
> On 25 Jul 2012, at 07:49, Qin Wu wrote:
> > Based on Alan's proposal to the open issue mentioed below, we like
to
> add one new section after SDP signaling section as follows:
> > "
> > 6. Consideration for duplicate packets discards
> >
> > Early/ late discards are usually regarded as a symptom of PDV due to
> congestion (or route changes) however duplicate packets discards have
> quite different causes.
> >
> > (a) A few duplicate packets can indicate some form of Layer 1/2 LAN
> problem. This would not need to be an accurate measure - more of a
> general barometer.
> >
> > (b) If the number of duplicate packets is very high then this may be
> due to RTP replication - and if this is the case then you would want
to
> compare the number of duplicate packets to the number of received
> packets in the same time interval. If the duplicate packet count is X%
> of the received packet count, this indicates that a (100-X)% packet
loss
> rate is being "hidden" by the replicated packets, and  it is very
useful
> to know the actual loss rate(useful to indicate that replication
should
> be kept "on" and helpful to know that there are some network issues
that
> need to be investigated).
> > "
> 
> Duplicating RTP packets in this way for robustness is a very bad idea,
> since - as you note - it disrupts all the RTCP statistics. If you need
> to send duplicate streams, draft-ietf-avtext-rtp-duplication-00
> describes how to do it without breakage. If you are going to mention
> duplication, I'd recommend including a reference to the working group
> draft to show how to do it right.
> 
> --
> Colin Perkins
> http://csperkins.org/
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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