Re: [xrblock] FW: New Version Notification for draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-00.txt

"Huangyihong (Rachel)" <rachel.huang@huawei.com> Fri, 04 July 2014 06:42 UTC

Return-Path: <rachel.huang@huawei.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 524481B2C03 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 23:42:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.852
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.852 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 dSw8D2moQkXg for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 23:42:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com (lhrrgout.huawei.com [194.213.3.17]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF7861B2BF4 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Jul 2014 23:42:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.7.190 (EHLO lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com) ([172.18.7.190]) by lhrrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.7-GA FastPath queued) with ESMTP id BGU01409; Fri, 04 Jul 2014 06:42:41 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from nkgeml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.98.56.36) by lhreml405-hub.china.huawei.com (10.201.5.242) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.158.1; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 07:42:40 +0100
Received: from NKGEML501-MBS.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.155]) by nkgeml405-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.98.56.36]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Fri, 4 Jul 2014 14:42:37 +0800
From: "Huangyihong (Rachel)" <rachel.huang@huawei.com>
To: Alan Clark <alan.d.clark@telchemy.com>, "xrblock@ietf.org" <xrblock@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [xrblock] FW: New Version Notification for draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-00.txt
Thread-Index: AQHPlp/elLnCAfPjQkm4A9SR9MzQBJuNoK8AgAF3V4A=
Date: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 06:42:36 +0000
Message-ID: <51E6A56BD6A85142B9D172C87FC3ABBB861E97E5@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com>
References: <51E6A56BD6A85142B9D172C87FC3ABBB861E9387@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <53B53120.60801@telchemy.com>
In-Reply-To: <53B53120.60801@telchemy.com>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.41.144]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/xrblock/p-FG4WsPJPN7cblUHgYlMbS-UEA
Subject: Re: [xrblock] FW: New Version Notification for draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-00.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: Fri, 04 Jul 2014 06:42:46 -0000

Hi Alan,

Thanks for your comments. Please see inline.

BR,
Rachel

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Alan Clark [mailto:alan.d.clark@telchemy.com]
> Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 6:32 PM
> To: Huangyihong (Rachel); xrblock@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [xrblock] FW: New Version Notification for
> draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-00.txt
> 
> Hi Rachel
> 
> A few quick comments:
> 
> (i) I would avoid the use of the term "lossless" to mean video with no packet
> losses - "lossless" is usually used to mean that the video encoding and decoding
> process introduces no distortion or error. You could use "Loss Free Seconds" or
> be consistent with the other loss concealment draft and use the terms
> concealed/ unconcealed.

[Rachel]: Thanks for the suggestion. I'm not using unconcealed is because I think it may contain video with packet losses but have not be concealed. "Loss Free Seconds" could be a good choice.
> 
> (ii) I would suggest changing
> 
> "Interactive repairs need the communication between receiver and sender.
> The receiving side using interactive repairs usually provides feedback message
> to the sending side for specific help. Retransmission is an effective interactive
> packet loss recovery technique for real-time applications with relaxed delay
> bounds. The sender resends packets when the sender notices the packets have
> been either damaged or lost.
> Protocols which provide such technique use a combination of acknowledgments,
> retransmission of missing and/or damaged packets. For example, RTP
> retransmission [4588]. Besides retransmission, there are two major feedback
> messages for asking for sender side repair FIR
> (RFC5104) or PLI (RFC4585)."
> 
> to
> 
> "Error concealment may involve feedback from the receiver to the sender.
> Retransmission may be used on connections with low delay or in
> delay-insensitive applications; the receiver detects missing packets or missing
> content and sends retransmission requests to the sender, typically using RTCP
> messages (RFC 4585, RFC 4588, RFC 5105 ). Other forms of feedback include
> control of the rate of forward error correction (FEC) codes and encoder
> parameters."

[Rachel]: Good suggestion. Thanks.

> 
> (iii) I would tend to use the term Retransmission rather than Interactive Repair
> for Video Loss Concealment Method as other forms of interactive repair would
> overlap with other terms (e.g. dynamic control of FEC rate would be an Error
> Resilient method).

[Rachel]: Okay, I agree. I'll change it in the next version.
> 
> (iv) Some of the language in the draft was reused word-for-word from other
> documents (e.g. Section 3 incorporates wording from my email to the XRBLOCK
> on 10/10/12) - you should attribute this appropriately.

[Rachel]: Right. Really sorry about that - copying the words without any reference or even asking. As you're the proposer, would you like to be the co-author of this draft?

> 
> Regards
> 
> Alan
> 
> 
> On 7/3/14, 5:19 AM, Huangyihong (Rachel) wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > I have just submitted a new draft about extending RTCP XR to include video
> loss concealment metrics. Your review and comments are highly appreciated.
> >
> > BR,
> > Rachel
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: internet-drafts@ietf.org [mailto:internet-drafts@ietf.org]
> > Sent: Thursday, July 03, 2014 5:17 PM
> > To: Huangyihong (Rachel); Huangyihong (Rachel)
> > Subject: New Version Notification for
> > draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-00.txt
> >
> >
> > A new version of I-D, draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-00.txt
> > has been successfully submitted by Rachel Huang and posted to the IETF
> repository.
> >
> > Name:		draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc
> > Revision:	00
> > Title:		RTCP XR Report Block for Loss Concealment Metrics Reporting
> on Video Applications
> > Document date:	2014-07-03
> > Group:		Individual Submission
> > Pages:		10
> > URL:
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-00.txt
> > Status:
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc/
> > Htmlized:
> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-video-lc-00
> >
> >
> > Abstract:
> >     This draft defines a new video loss concealment block type to augment
> >     those defined in [RFC3611] and [i.d-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-loss-
> >     concealment] for use in a range of RTP video applications.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > The IETF Secretariat
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > xrblock mailing list
> > xrblock@ietf.org
> > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock
> >