Subject: [AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 20:58:30 -0700

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance Working Group of the IETF.

	Title           : Monitoring Architecture for RTP
	Author(s)       : Qin Wu
                          Geoff Hunt
                          Philip Arden
	Filename        : draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12.txt
	Pages           : 29
	Date            : 2012-04-17

   This memo proposes an architecture for extending RTP Control Protocol
   (RTCP) with a new RTCP Extended Reports (XR) (RFC3611) block type to
   report new metrics regarding media transmission or reception quality,
   following RTCP guideline established in RFC5968.  This memo suggests
   that a new block should contain a single metric or a small number of
   metrics relevant to a single parameter of interest or concern, rather
   than containing a number of metrics which attempt to provide full
   coverage of all those parameters of concern to a specific
   application.  Applications may then "mix and match" to create a set
   of blocks which covers their set of concerns.  Where possible, a
   specific block should be designed to be re-usable across more than
   one application, for example, for all of voice, streaming audio and
   video.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12.txt

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

This Internet-Draft can be retrieved at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12.txt

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 15:13:35 +0200

WG, Colin and Charles

This version intends to address the WG last call comments. I would
recommend that people review the changes. I will give people a week to
review this. Please provide any feedback on the changes no later than
1st of May.

Cheers

Magnus

On 2012-04-18 05:58, [email-masked] wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
> 

-- 

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 15:17:46 +0200

Authors,

I have reviewed the latest changes and do wonder if the proposed
formulations really are the correct one.

Full diff:
http://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12

Section 5.2:
Report blocks that require such correlation need to include the payload
type of the reported media, and must signal details and parameters of
the payload format to which that payload type is bound.

I think my grief with the above sentence is the second half. I don't
find it appropriate that each report block include details and
parameters of the the payload format. I think the approriate level is to
include the payload type and use the functions you anyway have for
associating signalling with media session capture to store the actual
parameter?

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

---

From: "Roni Even" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 23:01:34 +0300

Hi Magnus,
I think that one reason for having the information in the RTCP report may be
for RTCP monitors who just see the RTCP messages and not the signaling.
Anyhow it is relevant to codec metrics and not to the transport metrics
Roni

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of
> Magnus Westerlund
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 4:18 PM
> To: [email-masked]
> Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12.txt
> 
> Authors,
> 
> parameters of the the payload format. I think the approriate level is
> to include the payload type and use the functions you anyway have for

---

From: Qin Wu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:32:44 +0800

Hi, Magnus:
Thank for your comment, please see my replies inline.

>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Magnus Westerlund" <[email-masked]>
>To: <[email-masked]>
>Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 9:17 PM

>parameters of the the payload format. 

[Qin]: Two things I like to clarify:
a. Not each the report block needs to include payload format related parameters.
Only codec dependent report block does. e.g., report blocks that support multi-channel 
audio or multi-layer video defined in draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-qoe includes codec dependent metrics.

b. Such report blocks only need to include payload type and don't need to include
details and parameters of the payload format. The signaling may be needed to 
associate details and parameters of payload format with such report block, e.g.,
in the middle of session, payload format changes.

>I think the approriate level is to
>include the payload type and 

[Qin]: That's what currently section 5.3 said. The reason to add payload type is following
the Paris discussion about QoE metrics, we think QoE for a single stream will also depend 
on the payload format in use, and will be meaningless unless that payload format is known. 

>use the functions you anyway have for

[Qin]: What's the difference with what section 5.3, second half part said?
The reason to say "must signal details and parameters of
the payload format to which that payload type is bound" is becos

For one RTP session, there may have multiple payload formats between
RTP participants that can be negotiated, the payload format may changes 
in the mid-session, in such cases, some kind of mechanisms are required to signal what 
payload format was in use for the reporting interval.

If I miss anything, please let me know.

---

From: Qin Wu <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:33:18 +0800

Yes, I Agree.

Regards!
-Qin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Roni Even" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Magnus Westerlund'" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 4:01 AM
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12.txt

Hi Magnus,

---

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:45:41 +0100

Magnus,

> associating signalling with media session capture to store the actual

I don't interpret that text as requiring the report blocks to include details of the parameters of the payload format. Rather, those parameters need to be signalled. Perhaps a better phrasing would be:

"Report blocks that require such correlation need to include the payload type of the reported media. In addition, it is necessary to signal the details and parameters of the payload format to which that payload type is bound using some out-of-band means (e.g., as part of an SDP offer/answer exchange)."

-- 
Colin Perkins
http://csperkins.org/

---

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 10:46:50 +0100

Magnus,

I'm happy with the changes (although you might want to include a clarification to Section 5.2 along the lines that I just proposed).

Colin

-- 
Colin Perkins
http://csperkins.org/

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 16:13:59 +0200

On 2012-04-25 11:45, Colin Perkins wrote:
>> Section 5.2: Report blocks that require such correlation need to
>> include the payload type of the reported media, and must signal
>> details and parameters of the payload format to which that payload
>> type is bound.
>> 
>> I think my grief with the above sentence is the second half. I
>> don't find it appropriate that each report block include details
>> and parameters of the the payload format. I think the approriate
>> level is to include the payload type and use the functions you
>> anyway have for associating signalling with media session capture
>> to store the actual parameter?
> 
> 
> I don't interpret that text as requiring the report blocks to include
> details of the parameters of the payload format. Rather, those
> parameters need to be signalled. Perhaps a better phrasing would be:
> 
> "Report blocks that require such correlation need to include the
> payload type of the reported media. In addition, it is necessary to
> signal the details and parameters of the payload format to which that
> payload type is bound using some out-of-band means (e.g., as part of
> an SDP offer/answer exchange)."
> 

The proposed text is much clearer on the signaling being out of band in
relation to RTCP and that is how I personally think it should be.

Authors, are you also fine with the text proposed by Colin?

cheers

Magnus Westerlund

---

From: Qin Wu <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2012 08:33:50 +0800

Yes, it looks good to us. Thanks.

Regards!
-Qin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Magnus Westerlund" <[email-masked]>
To: "Colin Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 10:13 PM
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12.txt

cheers

Magnus Westerlund

---

From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 11:21:47 -0700

The changes addressed all my comments, with the exception of the following typo:

> 13) Section 5.3,
> r/even if though/even though

Note that section 5.3 is not section 5.4, but the same typo exists.

Cheers,
Charles

> From: Magnus Westerlund [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 6:14 AM
> To: [email-masked]; Colin Perkins; Charles Eckel (eckelcu)
> > A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts
> directories. This draft is a work item of the Audio/Video Transport
> Core Maintenance Working Group of the IETF.
> >

---

From: Qin Wu <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2012 09:35:36 +0800

Hi, Charles:
I missed this typo you commented earlier.
I will fix it in the update. Thanks.

Regards!
-Qin
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Charles Eckel (eckelcu)" <[email-masked]>
To: "Magnus Westerlund" <[email-masked]>; <[email-masked]>; "Colin Perkins" <[email-masked]>
Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 2:21 AM
Subject: Re: [AVTCORE] I-D Action: draft-ietf-avtcore-monarch-12.txt

Cheers,
Charles