Re: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization

"Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com> Mon, 13 May 2013 09:34 UTC

Return-Path: <ron.even.tlv@gmail.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 75E0121F90F1 for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 02:34:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.516
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.516 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.083, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 U4f-5n6mnyrZ for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 13 May 2013 02:34:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-we0-x235.google.com (mail-we0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::235]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 674A521F9234 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 02:34:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id q55so5989920wes.12 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Mon, 13 May 2013 02:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date :message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-mailer:thread-index :content-language; bh=N4YqVunQwiyKDcNsrdgWP6EqbLbZnJdOj18pnGDEq/Q=; b=JO0xSN/S3mEJmU9ZA7g2V+UiVUpmAldY9QPaXymlRuYhD7tAM64hvBfNncxGWhmrdq emz34qgIAyd92UjHRVuJZ4ndQwHUBzHYOyVTxOM1+lu0TdV0FabTfC7e4QnogQGm2p3t kOofvH1e9Km23FDrXDJKi4fGoSd6OIBGr8INmtClNfnGeJSKPnavb6Ee5usf/BA2Gr27 Fzttiighh5X0rAbty99b1gjXTidrHfx/nEkBsE8gS1Ag6XZJR1el+6oFU2fPserfnql7 9r/SVVXf1bXQzSz25eljkmqB9OIq20+/D+cavsFn3ltwRIDAErSZCUVijsMMyjccjtOl P6AQ==
X-Received: by 10.194.178.162 with SMTP id cz2mr38708482wjc.27.1368437686457; Mon, 13 May 2013 02:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from RoniE (bzq-79-181-177-28.red.bezeqint.net. [79.181.177.28]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w8sm9438093wiz.0.2013.05.13.02.34.43 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 13 May 2013 02:34:45 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Roni Even" <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>
To: "'Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\)'" <dromasca@avaya.com>, "'Huangyihong \(Rachel\)'" <rachel.huang@huawei.com>, "'Qin Wu'" <bill.wu@huawei.com>, "'Shida Schubert'" <shida@ntt-at.com>, "'xrblock'" <xrblock@ietf.org>
References: <BA5D79A3-15E9-4038-851F-C4A37A638D25@ntt-at.com> <01cc01ce4cbf$8aa27450$9fe75cf0$@gmail.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA43A5187C@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <001801ce4ed9$d6b37d00$841a7700$@gmail.com> <B8F9A780D330094D99AF023C5877DABA43B18750@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <51E6A56BD6A85142B9D172C87FC3ABBB45802B6D@nkgeml501-mbs.china.huawei.com> <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA16A98F@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
In-Reply-To: <9904FB1B0159DA42B0B887B7FA8119CA16A98F@AZ-FFEXMB04.global.avaya.com>
Date: Mon, 13 May 2013 12:33:50 +0300
Message-ID: <009101ce4fbc$fba25990$f2e70cb0$@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0092_01CE4FD6.20F16650"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0
Thread-Index: AQJaaNKMUfnTOsgq3JBpXxYuv9fH/QK3JhaSAhNqxIsCGwP0WgKeR9B4AbEhYVUCUswgh5d+absA
Content-Language: en-us
Cc: 'xrblock-chairs' <xrblock-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization
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: Mon, 13 May 2013 09:34:50 -0000

Hi Dan,

I am OK with the current structure. Just need to change the reserved to 8
bits

Roni

 

From: Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [mailto:dromasca@avaya.com] 
Sent: 13 May, 2013 11:46 AM
To: Huangyihong (Rachel); Qin Wu; Roni Even; 'Shida Schubert'; 'xrblock'
Cc: 'xrblock-chairs'
Subject: RE: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization

 

Any other opinions on this issue? 

 

Roni, I understand that your preference for option 2 is not blocking. Am I
correct? 

 

Thanks and Regards,

 

Dan

 

 

 

From: xrblock-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Huangyihong (Rachel)
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 4:58 AM
To: Qin Wu; Roni Even; 'Shida Schubert'; 'xrblock'
Cc: 'xrblock-chairs'
Subject: Re: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization

 

Hi Qin and Roni,

 

I agree option 1 is more appropriate for this report block. And I'll revise
the "reserved"  field in section 3.2 to 8 bits.

Thanks.

 

Best Regards!

Rachel

 

From: xrblock-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Qin Wu
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2013 8:57 AM
To: Roni Even; 'Shida Schubert'; 'xrblock'
Cc: 'xrblock-chairs'
Subject: Re: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization

 

I understand your reason. However in other XRBLOCK drafts using I field, at
least one type of Interval metric flag is used. 

unlike other XRBLOCK drafts using I field, none of Interval metric flags
(from I=00 to I=11) is used in this draft.

So I prefer to keep as it does.

 

From: Roni Even [mailto:ron.even.tlv@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, May 12, 2013 2:28 PM
To: Qin Wu; 'Shida Schubert'; 'xrblock'
Cc: 'xrblock-chairs'
Subject: RE: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization

 

Hi Qin,

My only reason for option 2 is to keep the header the same. There is no
other reason

Roni

 

From: Qin Wu [mailto:bill.wu@huawei.com] 
Sent: 10 May, 2013 4:05 AM
To: Roni Even; 'Shida Schubert'; 'xrblock'
Cc: 'xrblock-chairs'
Subject: RE: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization

 

Hi,Roni:

Thank for your comment, if I understand correctly, Initial Synchronization
Delay metric

Only needs to be reported once, i.e., at the beginning of the session since

the value of Initial Synchronization Delay metric usually is fixed and will

Not change at each report interval.

So I think your 1st option is more straightforward.

 

Regards!

-Qin

From: xrblock-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Roni Even
Sent: Thursday, May 09, 2013 10:15 PM
To: 'Shida Schubert'; 'xrblock'
Cc: 'xrblock-chairs'
Subject: Re: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for
draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization

 

Hi,

I reviewed the latest version. It looks OK.

I have one comment

The "reserved" field in section 3.2 should be 8 bits since the "I" field was
removed.

Another option is to keep the "I" field and say that it should be ignored

Roni Even

 

From: xrblock-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:xrblock-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
Of Shida Schubert
Sent: 08 May, 2013 4:56 AM
To: xrblock
Cc: xrblock-chairs
Subject: [xrblock] 2nd WGLC for draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization

 

 This is an announcement of a 2 weeks XRBLOCK WG last call on 
"Report Block for Synchronization Delay and Offset Metrics Reporting" 
priort o requesting publication of the document as a proposed standard. 

 

 As per discussion at the last meeting, we are running a second 

WGLC on this draft.


Please send your comments, including nits, to the list by the

22nd of May

If you read the draft and you see no issues, concerns, or nits, please
express the fact that you have no issue progressing the draft on the
list as well. 

The latest version can be found here:

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-04.txt

Regards

Shida as co-chair