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

Alan Clark <alan.d.clark@telchemy.com> Thu, 26 July 2012 11:25 UTC

Return-Path: <alan.d.clark@telchemy.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 F132121F8582 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 04:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.399, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396]
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 b8uDAVj9YGen for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 04:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp01.myhostedservice.com (smtp01.myhostedservice.com [216.134.213.70]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E44021F8543 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 04:25:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail01.netplexity.net (172.29.251.14) by SMTP01.netplexity.local (172.29.211.9) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 14.0.722.0; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 07:25:16 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.7] (c-24-98-22-58.hsd1.ga.comcast.net [24.98.22.58]) by mail01.netplexity.net with SMTP; Thu, 26 Jul 2012 07:25:10 -0400
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.32.0.111121
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 07:25:05 -0400
From: Alan Clark <alan.d.clark@telchemy.com>
To: Glen Zorn <glenzorn@gmail.com>, xrblock@ietf.org
Message-ID: <CC36A151.485CE%alan.d.clark@telchemy.com>
Thread-Topic: [xrblock] Fw: I-D Action: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-discard-05.txt
Thread-Index: Ac1rIU36gUyzw+eWVkaICcHKNkfUsQ==
In-Reply-To: <1343283100.7688.259.camel@gwz-laptop>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3426132311_7965189"
Subject: Re: [xrblock] Fw: 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 11:25:19 -0000

Because packet discard often results from high levels of jitter/PDV

Alan


On 7/26/12 2:11 AM, "Glen Zorn" <glenzorn@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 2012-07-25 at 14:49 +0800, 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.
>> 
> Why is PDV mentioned here?
> 
> ...
> 
> _______________________________________________
> xrblock mailing list
> xrblock@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock