Subject: [xrblock] Review of "draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-discard-02"

From: "Rachel Huang(yihong)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2011 12:00:24 +0000

Hi, 
I'm also interested in these expired drafts. I'd like to see them moving forward.

Below are my comments to "draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-discard-02":

1.delete the last two paragraph of clause 1.1, cause the measurement identity block is still in progress, and also there is no more such tag usage description in monitoring architecture.

2. I propose to modify clause 2 like this:
  "2. Definition
   A Lost packet: a packet shall be regarded as lost if it fails to arrive within an implementation-specific time window.
   A Discarded packet: a packet that arrives within this time window but is too early or late ot be played out shall be regarded as discarded.
   A recieved packet: A packet that is neither a lost packet or a discarded packet shall be regarded as received."
 
3  I propose to move some text in clause 2 to clause 3, just like this:
   
   "3.  Discard Metric Report Block
      
      The Discard Metric counts only discarded packets.  The metric "cumulative number of packets
      lost" defined in [RFC3550] reports a count of packets lost from
      the media stream (single SSRC within single RTP session).
      Similarly the metric "number of packets discarded" reports a count
      of packets discarded from the media stream (single SSRC within
      single RTP session) arriving at the receiver.  Another metric
      defined in [POSTREPAIRLOSS] is available to report on packets
      which are not recovered by any repair techniques which may be in
      use.
      For Voice-over-IP applications of the metric, if Voice Activity
      Detection is used then the proportion of packets lost and
      discarded shall be determined based on transmitted packets, i.e.
      packets that contained silence and were not transmitted shall not
      be considered, because they do not form part of the RTP sequence.
    "
4.  remove the 'I' field from the Report Block Structure and the related description from clause 3.2, cause I don't see any important reasons to include both interval and cumulative metirc.

5.  remove the tag field from the report block structure and the related description from clause 3.2, cause there's still consensus in measurement identifier block.

6.  add SSRC field to the report block structure and the SSRC field description to clause 3.2.

7.  add begin_seq and end_seq field to the report block structure to indicate the intervals. And add their field description to clause 3.2.

8.  remove the last paragraph of the description of "number of packets discarded", cause it describes the relationship between this report block and measurement identitier block.

Best Regards!
Rachel

________________________________________
发件人: [email-masked] [[email-masked]] 代表 Charles Eckel (eckelcu) [[email-masked]]
发送时间: 2011年10月5日 5:14
到: [email-masked]
主题: [xrblock] status of workgroup milestones and drafts

This is meant to serve as both an overall status update to the group as
well as a call to action for individuals to author and/or review
existing drafts.

The following drafts have been adopted as working group drafts, serving
as replacements for the expired drafts adopted previously for the
associated milestone. The announcement e-mails posted to the list
earlier today. Please review and comment on the drafts.

Milestone: Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Packet Delay Variation Metric
Reporting
Expired Draft:           draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-pdv-03.txt
Newly Approved WG Draft: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-pdv-00

Milestone: Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Measurement Identity
Expired Draft:           draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-meas-identity-02
Newly Approved WG Draft: draft-ietf-xrblock-rtcp-xr-meas-identity-00

The following individual drafts exist as candidates for existing
milestones. Please review and comment on the these drafts. The review
comments and list discussion will help determine which drafts should be
adopted as working group drafts.

Milestone: Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Run Length Encodings of
Discarded Packets
Individual Draft: draft-ott-xrblock-rtcp-xt-discard-metrics-01

Milestone: Submit RTCP XR Report Block for QoE Metrics Reporting
Individual Draft: draft-wu-xrblock-rtcp-xr-quality-monitoring-03

The following drafts were previously adopted as AVT working group drafts
targeting specific XRBLOCK milestones. Since then, XRBLOCK has split
from AVT, and the drafts have expired. Both Qin Wu and Alan Clark have
expressed interest in seeing these drafts moved forward. Please let the
group know if you are interested in authoring any of these specific
drafts.

Milestone: Mar 2011     Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Burst/Gap
Discard metric Reporting
Expired Draft: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-discard-02

Milestone: Mar 2011     Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Burst/Gap Loss
metric Reporting
Expired Draft: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-burst-gap-loss-01

Milestone: Jun 2011     Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Concealed
Seconds metric Reporting
Expired Draft: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-concsec-02

Milestone: Jun 2011     Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Delay metric
Reporting
Expired Draft: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-delay-02

Milestone: Jun 2011     Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Discard metric
Reporting
Expired Draft: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-discard-02

Milestone: Sep 2011     Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Jitter Buffer
Metric Reporting
Expired Draft: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-jb-02

Milestone: Sep 2011     Submit RTCP XR Report Block for Loss Concealment
metric Reporting
Expired Draft: draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-loss-conceal-02

The following individual drafts are active, but there are not yet
workgroup milestones associated with them. Please review and comment on
the these drafts. The review comments and list discussion will help
determine if new milestones should be added to the workgroup charter.

draft-asaeda-xrblock-rtcp-xr-synchronization-02
draft-huang-xrblock-rtcp-xr-decodability-01
draft-xia-xrblock-rtcp-xr-layered-statistics-01
draft-zorn-xrblock-rtcp-xr-al-stat-02

Cheers,
David and Charles, as WG Chairs
_______________________________________________
xrblock mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xrblock

---

From: "Rachel Huang(yihong)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2011 13:51:04 +0000

Hi, Colin,

Good suggestion!  Let's leave it for now.

Best regards!
Rachel
________________________________________
发件人: Colin Perkins [[email-masked]]
发送时间: 2011年10月13日 21:41
到: Rachel Huang(yihong)
主题: Re: 答复: [xrblock]  Review of "draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-discard-02"

I'd suggest leaving it for now, and revising based on the mailing list discussion over the next week or so.

Colin

On 13 Oct 2011, at 11:58, Rachel Huang(yihong) wrote:
> Hi, Colin,
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> Okay, I'll remove that part from my comments and see whether we should add it after the measurement identity block  has been matured.
>
> Best Regards!
> Rachel
>
> 发件人: Colin Perkins [[email-masked]]
> 发送时间: 2011年10月13日 18:03
> 到: Rachel Huang(yihong)
> 主题: Re: [xrblock]  Review of "draft-ietf-avt-rtcp-xr-discard-02"
>
> Rachel,
>
> One minor comment inline.
> Colin
>
> On 12 Oct 2011, at 13:00, Rachel Huang(yihong) wrote:
>> Hi,
> If the group decides to continue with the measurement identity block draft, then the begin_seq and end_seq fields are not needed, since a measurement identity block will be sent along with the discard metric block and will include the necessary information. I don't think those parts of the measurement identity block should be kept, but the decision should be made before you add these fields to this draft.
>
> --
> Colin Perkins
> http://csperkins.org/