Subject: [AVT] RTP MIB Extensions

From: "Romascanu, Dan (Dan)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 21:39:35 +0200

Please allow me to make more clear my points expressed in the final minutes of the AVT WG meeting today related to http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/internet-drafts/draft-clark-avt-rtpmibv2-00.txt

1. This MIB includes extensions to the RTP MIB (RFC 2959) related to RTCP-XR (RFC 3611). At the same time, there seems to be a need to update RFC 2959 as result of the evolution of the Real Time Protocol from RFC 1889 to RFC 3550. I strongly suggest to do this in two separate MIBs separate documents:
- a new RTP MIB, updating to RFC 2959
- a supplementary RTCP-XR MIB, with the MIB objects relevant for hosts or monitors running RTCP-XR. 
This more modular and scalable structure would allow the two different MIBs to be progressed separately, without creating a tight dependency among them, and would allow adding other modules in the future.
2. There is a need for a better coordination, and possibly some consolidation between the RTCP-XR MIB and work being done in other WGs in the IETF - especially the RMON MIB WG (http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/html.charters/rmonmib-charter.html) work on Application Performance Monitoring and Real-Time Application Monitoring to create a consistent framework for performance monitoring, and avoid duplication. While RTCP-XR covers an important aspect of media monitoring when RTP is used, it does not cover the whole application space where RTP streams can be used. I would be glad to provide more information, or work with the authors of the different proposals in AVT to try to reach this goal. 

Regards,

Dan

---

From: "Alan Clark" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2003 11:43:19 -0500

RTP MIB ExtensionsDan

I have no issue with the idea of progressing updates to the RTP MIB and
keeping the RTCP XR MIB separate - I'll update the draft accordingly.  There
is also no disagreement that the RTCP XR VoIP metrics only address VoIP
whereas the envisaged scope of RAQMON is broader.

Regards

Alan Clark
Telchemy

  -----Original Message-----
  From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of
Romascanu, Dan (Dan)
  Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 2:40 PM
  To: [email-masked]
  Cc: [email-masked]; Bert Wijnen (E-mail)
  Subject: [AVT] RTP MIB Extensions

  Please allow me to make more clear my points expressed in the final
minutes of the AVT WG meeting today related to
http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/internet-drafts/draft-clark-avt-rtpmibv2-0
0.txt

  1. This MIB includes extensions to the RTP MIB (RFC 2959) related to
RTCP-XR (RFC 3611). At the same time, there seems to be a need to update RFC
2959 as result of the evolution of the Real Time Protocol from RFC 1889 to
RFC 3550. I strongly suggest to do this in two separate MIBs separate
documents:

  - a supplementary RTCP-XR MIB, with the MIB objects relevant for hosts or
monitors running RTCP-XR.

  This more modular and scalable structure would allow the two different
MIBs to be progressed separately, without creating a tight dependency among
them, and would allow adding other modules in the future.

  2. There is a need for a better coordination, and possibly some
consolidation between the RTCP-XR MIB and work being done in other WGs in
the IETF - especially the RMON MIB WG
(http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/html.charters/rmonmib-charter.html) work
on Application Performance Monitoring and Real-Time Application Monitoring
to create a consistent framework for performance monitoring, and avoid
duplication. While RTCP-XR covers an important aspect of media monitoring
when RTP is used, it does not cover the whole application space where RTP
streams can be used. I would be glad to provide more information, or work
with the authors of the different proposals in AVT to try to reach this
goal.

  Regards,

  Dan

---

From: Colin Perkins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 21 Nov 2003 10:47:11 +0000

On Wednesday, Nov 12, 2003, at 19:39 Europe/London, Romascanu, Dan  
(Dan) wrote:
> http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/internet-drafts/draft-clark-avt- 
> rtpmibv2-00.txt
>
> RTCP-XR (RFC 3611). At the same time, there seems to be a need to  
> update RFC 2959 as result of the evolution of the Real Time Protocol  
> from RFC 1889 to RFC 3550. I strongly suggest to do this in two  
> separate MIBs separate documents:
>
> MIBs to be progressed separately, without creating a tight dependency  
> among them, and would allow adding other modules in the future.

Yes, I think this is a good idea.

> consolidation between the RTCP-XR MIB and work being done in other WGs  
> in the IETF - especially the RMON MIB WG  
> (http://www.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/html.charters/rmonmib-charter.html)  
> work on Application Performance Monitoring and Real-Time Application  
> Monitoring to create a consistent framework for performance  
> monitoring, and avoid duplication. While RTCP-XR covers an important  
> aspect of media monitoring when RTP is used, it does not cover the  
> whole application space where RTP streams can be used. I would be glad  
> to provide more information, or work with the authors of the different  
> proposals in AVT to try to reach this goal.

Thanks for the information - I'll look into it. If you would be willing  
to work with Alan Clark as the RTCP-XR MIB is developed, that would be  
helpful.

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

_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt