Re: [xrblock] WGLC - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb-02.txt

Glen Zorn <glenzorn@gmail.com> Sat, 15 December 2012 05:55 UTC

Return-Path: <glenzorn@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 D064721F8A5F for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:55:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_42=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 q1wczqkbiUSY for <xrblock@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:55:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-da0-f44.google.com (mail-da0-f44.google.com [209.85.210.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CADF521F8A52 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:55:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-da0-f44.google.com with SMTP id z20so1701756dae.31 for <xrblock@ietf.org>; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:55:47 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=201K4jajOp+oKojaAoZ+hMpUC4ZAticLnb4HG3pFJqc=; b=Rb2WawKItnkXq5aEOPQpHVgT2MT0hwEglIVdX9xKOd7NYkg4KraOWV4Bv5w5slmzF6 /m/jfsMEKnQKH27qmpA84NrX0baXE87rp8zuIxGobJsb6Gs0FKNxdASTQMzMhekjsLPR XuMfWhOuCjLB78v4RKGiyZaVQNDuIIydi5HHJu4qD+3KxiD9H7RJDih7WYxkWwnV8vk3 lKAcKBgnmpXewuwS9OfOlc70H1dKTS7P/RaBOvA1YNn+4pMWPG3XvJrbW7oEW5ZnTiGy AucLmTljWkRZPc57+lvm64Qbj5EpSEy2pPnzrjH8qLkkSFjwpZjPAorfyidkuuW7Vjk4 p0ZQ==
Received: by 10.68.224.165 with SMTP id rd5mr22718270pbc.49.1355550947560; Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:55:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.102] (ppp-110-169-250-159.revip5.asianet.co.th. [110.169.250.159]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id sg7sm4170965pbb.50.2012.12.14.21.55.45 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 14 Dec 2012 21:55:46 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <50CC10DF.4030403@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 12:55:43 +0700
From: Glen Zorn <glenzorn@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Qin Wu <bill.wu@huawei.com>
References: <50CAF991.8050508@gmail.com> <A58F079A8D804929AA28B535FAB72BAC@china.huawei.com>
In-Reply-To: <A58F079A8D804929AA28B535FAB72BAC@china.huawei.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: xrblock <xrblock@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [xrblock] WGLC - draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-jb-02.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: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 05:55:49 -0000

On 12/14/2012 06:20 PM, Qin Wu wrote:

...
>>
 >> The second sentence says:
 >>
 >> These metrics are used to measure how the jitter buffer behave as a
 >> result of the jitter and applicable to a range of RTP
 >> applications.
 >>
 >> The English language usage needs to be cleaned up a bit,
 >
 > [Qin]: Okay, maybe we can say: "
 >
 > These metrics are used to measure how the jitter buffer behaves
 > according to a result of the
 >
 > Packet Delay Variation and can be applicable to a range of RTP
 > applications. "
 >> but more importantly the statement sees to contradict the first
 >> sentence of Section 3 which says
 >>
 >> This block describes the configuration and operating parameters of
 >> the jitter buffer in the receiver of the RTP end system or RTP
 >> mixer which sends the report.
 >>
 >> How can both be correct?
 > [Qin]: I don't see they contradict. The configuration parameters are
 > referred to Jitter Buffer Configuration set in the block header while
 > the operating parameters are referred to those metrics included in
 > the payload of the block.

OK, I see; that was not at all obvious to me from the current text

>
 >>
 >> Sorry, but I have no idea what the third sentence means.
 > [Qin]:What the third sentence means is usually we don't consider how
 > the terminal affect
 >
 > real-timeapplication quality. however in pratice user may have
 > different experience
 >
 > to the application quality when they choose different terminal to
 > playout the received RTP stream,e.g., ipad,PC,smartphone with
 >
 > difference screen size, resolution and different buffer size to
 > process the data.
 >
 > So maybe we should rephase the paragraph in the section 4 as
 > follows:
 >
 > "
 >
 > Real-time applications employ a jitter buffer to smooth out jitter
 >
 > introduced on the path from source to destination. These metrics
 >
 > are used to measure how the jitter buffer at the receiving end of
 > RTP stream behaves according to a result of the
 >
 > Packet Delay Variation in the network and applicable to a range of
 > RTP applications.
 >
 > These metrics reflect how terminal related factor affects real-time
 >
 > application quality and useful to provide more accurate end user
 > quality experience.
 >
 > "

I have a different suggestion, now that I understand what you're trying 
to say :-).  How about this:

Real-time applications employ a jitter buffer to smooth out jitter 
introduced on the path from source to destination.  These metrics are 
used to report how the jitter buffer at the receiving end of RTP stream 
behaves as a result of jitter in the network and are applicable to a 
range of RTP applications.

These metrics reflect how terminal-related factors effect real-time 
application quality and are useful to provide better end-user quality of 
experience (QoE).

...

>
 >> *Section 3.2* The description of the "jitter buffer nominal delay"
 >> says that "It is calculated based on the time for packets spent in
 >> the jitter buffer." How is it calculated?
 > [Qin]:It will be calculate based on the difference between the time
 > when the packet enter into the jitter buffer and the time when the
 > packet come out from jitter buffer. It is mostly up to specific
 > implementation and doesn't need to spell out.

So it's OK if two different implementations produce different numbers 
from the same data?  That doesn't seem very interoperable, somehow.  
Maybe one problem I'm having with this is that the way the word 
"nominal" is used doesn't map to any definition of which I'm aware.

...