[R-C] Modular Congestion Control in rtcweb

[Wesley Eddy]

I think the first question that should be answered is why
not just use DCCP where this modularity already exists.

I think the answer might be that if you buy the requirement
to operate across multiple flows, and that you're doing the
muxing of them via RTP, then the feedback also needs to come
via RTP rather than on an aggregate below that DCCP might
provide.

This should probably be discussed though.


On 3/27/2012 8:46 AM, Luca De Cicco wrote:
> Well, I guess the first step is to define an interface that  congestion control
> modules should use. We could base this effort on the requirements defined
> in draft-jesup-rtp-congestion-reqs.
> 
>>From the implementation point of view, we should discuss how to
> distribute congestion control algorithms. Should we allow distribution
> of cc algos
> as  browser plug-ins to extend the ones standardized by the webrtc effort?
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Cheers,
> --
> Luca De Cicco, PhD, Eng.
> Politecnico di Bari
> Dipartimento di Elettrotecnica ed Elettronica
> Via Re David, 200 - Bari - ITALY
> Office: +39 080 596 3851
> 
> On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 2:24 PM, Wesley Eddy <wes at mti-systems.com> wrote:
>> On 3/27/2012 7:25 AM, Luca De Cicco wrote:
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> this mail follows a thread I've recently started at rtcweb at ietf.org.
>>> and moved to this mailing list following Harald's suggestion.
>>>
>>> Since congestion control is a fundamental building block
>>> for a multimedia communication framework such as webrtc,
>>> I think it makes sense to design the framework to allow
>>> using different congestion control algorithms such as it is
>>> done with audio/video codecs.
>>>
>>> Are there any plans to make the congestion control algorithm
>>> modular for multimedia transmission via PeerConnections?
>>>
>>> This would require the peers to select a particular congestion
>>> control algorithm at the establishment of the PeerConnection
>>> similarly to how the DCCP [1] protocol does at kernel level.
>>>
>>
>> It seems like a good idea to me, in order to make it
>> potentially easier to deploy upgrades to the algorithms
>> over time (especially since it seems that the algorithms
>> will start as question marks).
>>
>> This also motivates the question of why RTP over DCCP
>> isn't a potential solution.
>>
>> --
>> Wes Eddy
>> MTI Systems
> _______________________________________________
> Rtp-congestion mailing list
> Rtp-congestion at alvestrand.no
> http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtp-congestion
> 
> 


-- 
Wes Eddy
MTI Systems