[R-C] [ledbat] LEDBAT vs RTCWeb

[Piers O'Hanlon]

On 20 Apr 2012, at 13:32, Michael Welzl wrote:

> 
> On Apr 20, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Jim Gettys wrote:
> 
>> On 04/20/2012 07:55 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote:
>>> Hi Randell,
>>> 
>>> I didn't follow the whole discussion but regarding LEDBAT we have a TARGET
>>> delay of max. 100ms. That means you can choose a smaller one. We've chosen
>>> 100ms as a max as there is an ITU recommendation that 150 ms delay is
>>> acceptable for most user voice applications and we wanted for sure stay below
>>> that.
>> 
>> 100 ms + 75ms speed of light delay across the US (or equivalent across
>> Europe, for example) + 100ms at the receiving end....
>> 
>> Of course, it's even worse between continents, even without broken networks.
>> 
>> Not so nice....
> 
> Not argueing about your point here (I agree that we have to fix the edge), but: LEDBAT is an end-to-end mechanism, so I think that the 100ms reflect the total measured end-to-end delay.
> 
I think LEDBAT's target is the relative delay (i.e. from queues) - It's not clear how it would measure the total end-to-end delay.

Piers.

> Cheers,
> Michael
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rtp-congestion mailing list
> Rtp-congestion at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtp-congestion