[R-C] WG name (Re: Charter -> congestion avoidance vs. congestion control?)

Wed Aug 8 16:55:00 CEST 2012

I just liked the sound of Interactive Media; I agree to have "interactive" in the name is good (that's maybe a problem with the RMCAT name).
But I should probably add that *I* don't care much about the name.

On 8. aug. 2012, at 16:49, Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) wrote:

> I prefer an explicit reference to RTP (IRCC) not Media (IMCC) in the WG name, since we are explicitly targeting RTP, and plan to extend RTP/RTCP if necessary per the charter.
> 
> ...
> The working group will:
>        * Develop a clear understanding of the congestion control requirements for RTP flows, and document deficiencies of existing mechanisms such as TFRC with regards to these requirements.
>        * Define interactions between applications and RTP flows to enable signalling requirements such as per-packet priorities.
>        * Determine if there is an appropriate means to define standard RTP/RTCP extensions for carrying congestion control feedback, similar to how DCCP defines CCIDs, and if so, document such extensions as standards-track RFCs.
> ...
> 
> But I understand if that name may irk some folks... :)
> 
> Mo
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Saverio Mascolo [mailto:saverio.mascolo at gmail.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, August 08, 2012 7:31 AM
> To: Harald Alvestrand
> Cc: Mo Zanaty (mzanaty); John Leslie; rtp-congestion at alvestrand.no
> Subject: Re: [R-C] WG name (Re: Charter -> congestion avoidance vs. congestion control?)
> 
> IMCC - Interactive Media Congestion Control
> 
> On Tue, Aug 7, 2012 at 9:15 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no> wrote:
>> It's an old IETF meme that if you want lots of people to comment, one should
>> start discussing the name of something (protocol, WG, it doesn't matter).
>> 
>> I've got a page on the site for this subject:
>> 
>> http://rtp-congestion.alvestrand.com/bof-planning-page/naming
>> 
>> I've added IRCC to the suggestion list.
>> 
>> On 08/07/2012 09:10 PM, Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) wrote:
>> 
>> I'm glad John mentioned the proposed WG name.
>> - I think IRCC (Interactive RTP Congestion Control) may be better than
>> RMCAT.
>> - Congestion control seems to have become the more common general term, with
>> congestion avoidance often associated with a particular phase/state of
>> overall TCP congestion control. We're not working on TCP, but readers of our
>> charter and drafts will likely be well-versed in TCP CC/CA.
>> - "Media" and "Techniques" seem superfluous. What RTP payloads are we trying
>> to exclude by explicitly saying "Media"?
>> - Interactive is missing, since we are explicitly excluding non-interactive
>> RTP (e.g. highly buffered streaming applications).
>> 
>> So I would prefer the WG name to be IRCC (Interactive RTP Congestion
>> Control), and the charter to talk in terms of congestion control. We will
>> obviously have a control loop, and its time constant may be short or long,
>> depending on the final solution(s), but it's still a control loop at any
>> timescale.
>> 
>> Mo
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: rtp-congestion-bounces at alvestrand.no
>> [mailto:rtp-congestion-bounces at alvestrand.no] On Behalf Of John Leslie
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2012 8:35 AM
>> To: Harald Alvestrand
>> Cc: rtp-congestion at alvestrand.no
>> Subject: Re: [R-C] Charter -> congestion avoidance vs. congestion control?
>> 
>> Harald Alvestrand <harald at alvestrand.no> wrote:
>> 
>> When I first learned networking ~30 years ago, "congestion avoidance"
>> was the term used when you managed things so that congestion at the
>> media level could never happen (token ring, ATM), while "congestion
>> control" was the whole area of what you did either to avoid congestion
>> or to deal with it once it happened.
>> 
>>   30-years? A newcomer!!
>> 
>>   IMHO, both terms are kind of accidental -- congestion can only be
>> prevented if you know the entire path a packet will follow. "Congestion
>> control" is the term applied to the AIMD algorithm for TCP: IMHO to
>> indicate a control loop. But we could just as well have talked of it
>> as "congestion avoidance" since what it actually did is avoid sending
>> data into a path believed to be congested.
>> 
>>   "Congestion control" has always struck me as an optimistic name --
>> but then, _all_ names are optimistic! IMHO, what we will do for
>> congestion-management in RMCAT will look even less like a tight control
>> loop.
>> 
>> So I'd prefer "congestion control", since congestion is a fact of life;
>> we're dealing with it, not avoiding it at all cost - but I'm a bit
>> old-fashioned.
>> 
>>   Congestion which drives up delay will _need_ to be avoided in RMCAT.
>> "Congestion avoidance" to me has never meant "at all cost", but YMMV.
>> Myself, I'm more sensitive to any suggestion that RMCAT can "control"
>> overall congestion. We're going to find ourselves at the mercy of and
>> competing TCP streams (which will always try to fill the pipe); and
>> if we have any way to "control" them, it's not obvious to me.
>> 
>>   But perhaps the final argument is our name:
>> 
>> RTP Media Congestion Avoidance Techniques (RMCAT)
>> 
>> --
>> John Leslie <john at jlc.net>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Saverio Mascolo, Full Professor
> Dipartimento di Elettrotecnica ed Elettronica
> Politecnico di Bari
> Via Orabona 4, 70125 Bari Italy
> Tel. +39 080 5963621
> Fax. +39 080 5963410
> email:mascolo at poliba.it
> 
> http://c3lab.poliba.it
> 
> 
> =================================
> This message may contain confidential and/or legally privileged information.
>  If you are not the intended recipient of the message, please destroy it.
> Any unauthorized dissemination, distribution, or copying of the material in
> this message, and any attachments to the message, is strictly forbidden.
> _______________________________________________
> Rtp-congestion mailing list
> Rtp-congestion at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtp-congestion