Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adjustment type concealment
Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com> Tue, 23 October 2012 07:01 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 6A31E1F0C54 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 00:01:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.755
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.755 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.090, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 oDJcQGiUr6Qa for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 00:01:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 721551F0C51 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 00:01:13 -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 ALZ11622; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 07:01:12 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from LHREML405-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) by lhreml203-edg.huawei.com (172.18.7.221) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:00:58 +0100
Received: from SZXEML409-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.136) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 08:01:03 +0100
Received: from w53375 (10.138.41.149) by szxeml409-hub.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.136) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:00:58 +0800
Message-ID: <9D53E19D24074A6FABEA8B28CCEC805B@china.huawei.com>
From: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
To: Alan Clark <alan.d.clark@telchemy.com>
References: <CCA6BDFD.4B2BF%alan.d.clark@telchemy.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:00:58 +0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0B29_01CDB12F.356604B0"
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
Cc: xrblock@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adjustment type concealment
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: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 07:01:15 -0000
Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adjustment type concealmentMake sense to me. Thank for your clarification! Regards! -Qin ----- Original Message ----- From: Alan Clark To: Qin Wu Cc: xrblock@ietf.org Sent: Friday, October 19, 2012 8:21 PM Subject: Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adjustment type concealment Hi Qin There is an equivalent buffer adjustment behavior in video systems. If there is some need to increase or decrease the playout buffer size this can be accommodated by either temporarily adjusting the frame rate or freezing/ skipping frames. The extreme case of this is in a video streaming system which can pause playout for 10-30 seconds if a buffer outage occurs - typically the client will increase the playout buffer to allow for more variability in network or server induced delays. Best Regards Alan On 10/19/12 3:59 AM, "Qin Wu" <bill.wu@huawei.com> wrote: Hi,Alan: one follow up question is: Is Buffer adjustment type concealment applicable to video application? It seems Buffer Adjustment-type concealment is usually applied to audio. Regards! -Qin ----- Original Message ----- From: Alan Clark <mailto:alan.d.clark@telchemy.com> To: Qin Wu <mailto:bill.wu@huawei.com> Cc: xrblock@ietf.org Sent: Wednesday, October 10, 2012 5:20 PM Subject: Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adjustment type concealment Also - we should note that with video it is possible to use RTP based retransmission and also FEC (e.g. COP3) - typically these would only be used with IPTV as this is less delay sensitive than interactive services. Alan On 10/10/12 5:02 AM, "Alan Clark" <alan.d.clark@telchemy.com> wrote: Qin The wording in draft-ietf-xrblock-xr-consec-.. is definitely related to audio. Video does have loss concealment and there are a range of methods used, for example: (i) Frame freeze In this case the impaired video frame is not displayed and the previously displayed frame is hence "frozen" for the duration of the loss even (ii) Inter-frame extrapolation If an area of the video frame is damaged by loss, the same area from the previous frame(s) can be used to estimate what the missing pixels would have been. This can work well in a scene with no motion but can be very noticeable if there is significant movement from one frame to another. Simple decoders may simply re-use the pixels that were in the missing are, more complex decoders may try to use several frames to do a more complex extrapolation (iii) Interpolation A decoder may use the undamaged pixels in the image to estimate what the missing block of image should have (iv) Noise insertion A decoder may insert random pixel values - which would generally be less noticeable than a blank rectangle in the image Alan On 10/10/12 3:41 AM, "Qin Wu" <bill.wu@huawei.com> wrote: Hi, In draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-concsec,concealment is splitted into two type of concealments. One is Loss-Type concealment and the other is Buffer adjustment type concealment. So the question is are these two type of concealments applied to video? If the answer is yes, how to take video loss concealment into account? Since in the current draft, when we define Loss-type concealment and buffer adjustment type concealment, only audio loss concealment is considered. See section 2.2 of draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-concsec below for defintions of loss-type concealment and buffer adjustment type concealment: " Loss-type concealment is reactive insertion or deletion of samples in the audio playout stream due to effective frame loss at the audio decoder. "Effective frame loss" is the event in which a frame of coded audio is simply not present at the audio decoder when required. In this case, substitute audio samples are generally formed, at the decoder or elsewhere, to reduce audible impairment. Buffer Adjustment-type concealment is proactive or controlled insertion or deletion of samples in the audio playout stream due to jitter buffer adaptation, re-sizing or re-centering decisions within the endpoint. Because this insertion is controlled, rather than occurring randomly in response to losses, it is typically less audible than loss-type concealment. For example, jitter buffer adaptation events may be constrained to occur during periods of talker silence, in which case only silence duration is affected, or sophisticated time-stretching methods for insertion/deletion during favorable periods in active speech may be employed. For these reasons, buffer adjustment-type concealment MAY be exempted from inclusion in calculations of Concealed Seconds and Severely Concealed Seconds. " Regards! -Qin ---------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ 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 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ 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
- [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adjustm… Qin Wu
- Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adj… Alan Clark
- Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adj… Alan Clark
- Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adj… Qin Wu
- Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adj… Qin Wu
- Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adj… Qin Wu
- Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adj… Alan Clark
- Re: [xrblock] Loss-Type concealment vs Buffer adj… Qin Wu