[xrblock] Fw: I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03.txt

Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Thu, 18 October 2012 01:42 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 7A4EC1F0423 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 18:42:12 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.531
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.531 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.285, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_17=0.6, 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 CyngMK7pyOfh for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 18:42:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 94D431F041C for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Oct 2012 18:42:11 -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 ALS74675; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 01:42:10 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 02:40:17 +0100
Received: from SZXEML403-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.35) by lhreml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.217) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 02:41:09 +0100
Received: from w53375 (10.138.41.149) by szxeml403-hub.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:41:06 +0800
Message-ID: <A1C1BF50B7EC45ED9DBD47B0616CDB79@china.huawei.com>
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: xrblock@ietf.org
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 09:41:05 +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: [xrblock] Fw: I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03.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, 18 Oct 2012 01:42:12 -0000

On 18 October , 2012 9:27 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) Blocks for QoE Metric Reporting
> Author(s)       : Alan Clark
>                          Qin Wu
>                          Roland Schott
>                          Glen Zorn
> Filename        : draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe-03.txt
> Pages           : 16
> Date            : 2012-10-17
> 
> Abstract:
>   This document defines an RTP Control Protocol (RTCP) Extended Report
>   (XR) Block including two new segment types and associated SDP
>   parameters that allow the reporting of QoE metrics for use in a range
>   of RTP applications.
> 
> 
> The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe
> 
[Qin]: Here is our update to QoE draft, which address editorial comments
that was raised to PDV draft but are applied to this draft as well.
In addtion, we add several editor's note to point out one open issue, i.e.,
how to support MoS reference to indicate 
a.whether narrowband or wideband is used for audio
b. whether higher resolution or lower resolution are used for video.