[xrblock] Poll for progressing the QoE

Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com> Thu, 19 January 2012 11:59 UTC

Return-Path: <shida@ntt-at.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 7082921F8573 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 03:59:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -99.851
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-99.851 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.185, IP_NOT_FRIENDLY=0.334, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 jZ+nvglI1PbE for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 03:59:19 -0800 (PST)
Received: from gator465.hostgator.com (gator465.hostgator.com [69.56.174.130]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BCC321F8572 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 03:59:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [125.197.253.88] (port=52588 helo=[192.168.1.18]) by gator465.hostgator.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <shida@ntt-at.com>) id 1RnqeD-00039S-7i for xrblock@ietf.org; Thu, 19 Jan 2012 05:59:17 -0600
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
From: Shida Schubert <shida@ntt-at.com>
In-Reply-To: <E1CBF4C7095A3D4CAAAEAD09FBB8E08C06283BBB@xmb-sjc-234.amer.cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2012 20:58:57 +0900
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <31A44220-52DD-44AF-B931-5C50D888E26E@ntt-at.com>
References: <340EB250-499C-45C1-871E-936A2D0783A3@ntt-at.com> <E1CBF4C7095A3D4CAAAEAD09FBB8E08C06283BBB@xmb-sjc-234.amer.cisco.com>
To: xrblock <xrblock@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - gator465.hostgator.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - ntt-at.com
X-BWhitelist: no
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
X-Source-Sender: fl1-125-197-253-88.tky.mesh.ad.jp ([192.168.1.18]) [125.197.253.88]:52588
X-Source-Auth: shida@agnada.com
X-Email-Count: 1
X-Source-Cap: c3NoaWRhO3NzaGlkYTtnYXRvcjQ2NS5ob3N0Z2F0b3IuY29t
Subject: [xrblock] Poll for progressing the QoE
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, 19 Jan 2012 11:59:19 -0000

All;

Although a poll for draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring ended in
favor of adopting the draft, the comments provided by Colin are worth
noting as we move forward.

I do have some questions which I think will help us clarify 
the way forward. 

A. There are three segment types defined (1. each media 
   sent in separate RTP stream, 2. Layered video session, 
   3. Multi-channel audio) in the draft,  do we see a need for 
   all three right now or in near  future (say next 12 months) ? 

B. OR are we happy with only covering one for now (Likely 
   the 1. as I understand people are most interested in the 1.) 
   and create a draft when there is a real need for 2. and 3.?

C. If answer is yes to question A., do we want to see the 
   draft split into three as Colin proposed or have them all 
   defined in single draft as it currently is. 

I asked the AD if we can split the drafts into 3 drafts under 
single milestone but I want to make sure we do that after 
we agree as a WG that we need all three segment types 
RIGHT NOW before we do so. 

We have a lot of new items that people are interested in 
working on that are not covered in our milestones, so I 
want to make sure we focus on items that are "MUST 
have" rather than "MAY need it in future" or "NICE to have". 

Regards
 Shida