Subject: [AVT] New Version Notification for draft-brandenburg-avt-rtcp-for-idms-02

From: "Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 15:14:16 +0200

Hi All,

We have recently updated our internet-draft for inter-destination-media
synchronization using RTCP XR blocks. The updated version includes more
references and a shortened abstract.

We are looking forward to your comments and are especially interested in
how you think our ID relates to recent work within this WG to specify
guidelines for new XR blocks. 

Regards,

Ray van Brandenburg

-----Original Message-----
From: IETF I-D Submission Tool [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: maandag 11 oktober 2010 14:44
To: Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van
Subject: New Version Notification for
draft-brandenburg-avt-rtcp-for-idms-02 

A new version of I-D, draft-brandenburg-avt-rtcp-for-idms-02.txt has
been successfully submitted by Ray Brandenburg and posted to the IETF
repository.

Filename:	 draft-brandenburg-avt-rtcp-for-idms
Revision:	 02
Title:		 RTCP XR Block Type for inter-destination media
synchronization
Creation_date:	 2010-10-11
WG ID:		 Independent Submission
Number_of_pages: 11

Abstract:
This document specifies an RTCP XR Block Type and associated SDP
parameter for inter-destination media synchronization (IDMS). The RTCP
Block Type is used to collect media play-out information from
participants in a group watching a specific RTP media stream and to
distribute a summary of the collected information so that the
participants can synchronize play-out.

Typical applications for inter-destination media synchronization are
social TV, watching apart together and shared service control (i.e.
applications where two or more geographically separated users are
watching a media stream together).

The IETF Secretariat.

This e-mail and its contents are subject to the DISCLAIMER at http://www.tno.nl/disclaimer/email.html

---

From: Peter Musgrave <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 10:16:43 -0400

HI Ray,

I think this is a useful XR.

I lack background in the IDMS application.  Is the Boronat2009
reference available online anywhere? (I am interested in whether there
are separate XRs for audio and video and how the lipsync alignment
issues are handled within the overall synchronization strategy).

Should the relationship of this doc to ETSI TISPAN be mentioned in the Abstract?

Nits:
3. First use of MSAS is not expanded.
3.3 Typo s/SSCR/SSRC/

Regards,

Peter Musgrave

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 9:14 AM, Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Audio/Video Transport Working Group
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt
>

---

From: Ishan Vaishnavi <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2010 17:40:22 +0200

Hi Peter,

Thanks for taking time to review this document. Find my comments inline.

Cheers,
Ishan

> reference available online anywhere?

You need either an Elsevier account or a Science Direct one.
Here<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V0G-4SKB3J2-1&_user=10&_coverDate=03%2F31%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_origin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ed63673a77c38dc50c5fbc2199129d08&searchtype=a>is
the link. Hope that helps.

> (I am interested in whether there
In my opinion lip synchronization is somewhat out of the scope of this
document. The idea is that each distributed client reports its play-out
position of its "primary" stream. This primary stream can be a virtual
stream or a real audio, video, subtitles or images for that matter.  All
other streams locally on each client synchronize to that stream, this must
be done by the respective application. The current XR specification relates
to how to get these primary streams are synchronized across different
geographically separated clients. Maybe it can be extended to include this
local synchronization as well, but that's another discussion.

> Should the relationship of this doc to ETSI TISPAN be mentioned in the

I will leave this one for Ray.

---

From: "Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 09:47:57 +0200

Hi Peter,
 
Thanks for your comments. 

	Should the relationship of this doc to ETSI TISPAN be mentioned
in the Abstract?

I agree and will add this in the next version. While we're on the
subject: the main reason we have brought this work to the IETF is
because we feel the AVT WG should be the place where XR blocks are
specified. If there is enough interest around here, one option could be
to have the AVT WG take the lead on the standardization of this XR
block, either as an informational or standards track document. The
relevant sections of the ETSI TISPAN spec could then reference the
resulting RFC. How do you feel about this?
 
Regards,
 
Ray van Brandenburg

________________________________

From: Ishan Vaishnavi [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: maandag 11 oktober 2010 17:40
To: Peter Musgrave
Cc: Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: [AVT] New Version Notification for
draft-brandenburg-avt-rtcp-for-idms-02

Hi Peter,  

Cheers,
Ishan

You need either an Elsevier account or a Science Direct one. Here
<http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6V0G-4SKB3J2-
1&_user=10&_coverDate=03%2F31%2F2009&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=search&_ori
gin=search&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google&_acct=
C000050221&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=10&md5=ed63673a77c38dc50c5fb
c2199129d08&searchtype=a>  is the link. Hope that helps.

	(I am interested in whether there
	are separate XRs for audio and video and how the lipsync
alignment
	issues are handled within the overall synchronization strategy).

In my opinion lip synchronization is somewhat out of the scope of this
document. The idea is that each distributed client reports its play-out
position of its "primary" stream. This primary stream can be a virtual
stream or a real audio, video, subtitles or images for that matter.  All
other streams locally on each client synchronize to that stream, this
must be done by the respective application. The current XR specification
relates to how to get these primary streams are synchronized across
different geographically separated clients. Maybe it can be extended to
include this local synchronization as well, but that's another
discussion. 

	Should the relationship of this doc to ETSI TISPAN be mentioned
in the Abstract?

---

From: Peter Musgrave <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 08:13:23 -0400

Hi Ray,

That makes sense to me but I will defer to the AVT chairs w.r.t. the
ETSI interaction...

Peter Musgrave

On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 3:47 AM, Brandenburg, R. (Ray) van
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> I agree and will add this in the next version. While we're on the subject:
> the main reason we have brought this work to the IETF is because we feel the
> AVT WG should be the place where XR blocks are specified. If there is enough
> interest around here, one option could be to have the AVT WG take the lead
> on the standardization of this XR block, either as an informational or
> standards track document. The relevant sections of the ETSI TISPAN spec
> could then reference the resulting RFC. How do you feel about this?
>
> Regards,
>
> Ray van Brandenburg
>
>
>
> You need either an Elsevier account or a Science Direct one. Here is the
> link. Hope that helps.
>
>>