Skip to main content

Sending Multiple RTP Streams in a Single RTP Session
draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-multi-stream-11

Yes

(Ben Campbell)

No Objection

(Alia Atlas)
(Alissa Cooper)
(Alvaro Retana)
(Barry Leiba)
(Benoît Claise)
(Deborah Brungard)
(Jari Arkko)
(Kathleen Moriarty)
(Stephen Farrell)
(Terry Manderson)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 10 and is now closed.

Ben Campbell Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (for -10) Unknown

                            
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (2015-12-02 for -10) Unknown
Thank you for doing this work.

I have a small number of comments you might consider.

In this text:

      Note: The above is chosen to match the TCP initial window of 4
      packets, not the larger TCP initial windows for which there is an
      ongoing experiment.  The reason for this is a desire to be
      conservative, since an RTP endpoint will also in many cases start
      sending RTP data packets at the same time as these initial RTCP
      packets are sent.
      
Not to be pedantic, but it would be more correct to say "TCP maximum initial window of 4 packets". RFC 3390 describes this in TCP-speak as 

   Equivalently, the upper bound for the initial window size is based on
   the MSS, as follows:

       If (MSS <= 1095 bytes)
           then win <= 4 * MSS;
       If (1095 bytes < MSS < 2190 bytes)
           then win <= 4380;
       If (2190 bytes <= MSS)
           then win <= 2 * MSS;

If you end up making changes to this text, providing RFC 3390 as the reference for 4 and RFC 6928 for the experiment would make the reader's job easier.

In this text:

   The above algorithm has been shown in simulations to maintain the
   inter-RTCP packet transmission time distribution for each SSRC, and
   to consume the same amount of bandwidth as non-aggregated RTCP
   packets.  
   
is there a reference you could provide for the simulations?

In this text:

   The finality of sending RTCP BYE, means that endpoints needs to
   consider if the ceasing of transmission of an RTP stream is temporary
   or more permanent. 

I don't understand the subtlety of "more permanent" - is this "permanent"?
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Alvaro Retana Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Barry Leiba Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Benoît Claise Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Deborah Brungard Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2015-12-02 for -10) Unknown
opsdir review was by Juergen Schoenwaelder
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown

                            
Terry Manderson Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (for -10) Unknown