[R-C] Timely reaction time (Re: Comments on draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-congestion-01)

[Michael Welzl]

It totally does. Thanks!!

Cheers,
Michael


On Apr 18, 2012, at 9:21 PM, Matt Mathis wrote:

> Let me second Harald's point by making an observation:   Your
> (Michael's) solution has two subtasks: proper real time Congestion
> Control for a single flow and multiplexing multiple playload types
> onto a single flow.
>
> The short term agenda here is the first problem: proper real time CC
> for a single flow.
>
> There is (probably) 100% agreement that we need some solution to the
> 2nd problem (or at least some similar problem).
>
> But most of us do not want to put solving the second problem in the
> critical path for the first problem, which is essentially orthogonal.
>
> Note that the first problem might be concurrently solved and tested
> for both SRTP and RRTCC, since we all believe the algorithm might be
> implemented in either.
>
> Does this make sense?
>
> Thanks,
> --MM--
> The best way to predict the future is to create it.  - Alan Kay
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 16, 2012 at 7:25 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no 
> > wrote:
>> On 04/16/2012 03:48 PM, Michael Welzl wrote:
>>
>> I'm not sure my concerns about what is now called RRTCC are  
>> answered, but I
>> think that we pretty much agree design-wise anyway. I'm now just a  
>> bit
>> confused by the mix of 1) arguments against my suggestion to use  
>> only one
>> congestion control instance for everything (ideally by making all  
>> RTCweb
>> flows streams of one SCTP association), 2) some statements saying  
>> "yeah,
>> this was the plan anyway".
>>
>> Maybe it's because I don't know RTCweb well enough yet, or don't  
>> understand
>> who does what and who plans what... and maybe it's also because I  
>> proposed
>> too many intertwined things in one go (all-over-SCTP *and* one  
>> congestion
>> control instance for everything). Whatever. Anyway, I think it's an
>> interesting discussion  :-)
>>
>> Very possible - my take from RTCWEB side is that media over  
>> anything but
>> SRTP is just not going to happen this year (or perhaps any year), for
>> reasons having to do with installed base of a lot of stuff, while  
>> having a
>> bridge for congestion control information to flow between the  
>> "media side"
>> and the "sctp side" can be implemented in each implementation, and  
>> is such a
>> no-brainer than everyone agrees we should Just Do It.
>>
>> So since your note was "all in one go", it's no surprise that  
>> people seem to
>> be saying yes AND no....
>>
>>                   Harald
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Rtp-congestion mailing list
>> Rtp-congestion at alvestrand.no
>> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtp-congestion
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Rtp-congestion mailing list
> Rtp-congestion at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtp-congestion