Problem Statement and Use Cases for Video Cooperation Transport
draft-huang-fvn-use-cases-00

Document Type Active Internet-Draft (individual)
Last updated 2016-10-31
Stream (None)
Intended RFC status (None)
Formats plain text pdf html bibtex
Stream Stream state (No stream defined)
Consensus Boilerplate Unknown
RFC Editor Note (None)
IESG IESG state I-D Exists
Telechat date
Responsible AD (None)
Send notices to (None)
INTERNET-DRAFT                                                  R. Huang
Intended Status: Informational                                    J. You
Expires: May 4, 2017                                              Huawei
                                                        October 31, 2016

    Problem Statement and Use Cases for Video Cooperation Transport
                      draft-huang-fvn-use-cases-00

Abstract

   IP video traffic represents a large fraction of Internet traffic.
   Current infrastructures are not prepared to deal with the increasing
   amount of video traffic. How to transmit video traffic efficiently
   poses traffic management challenges to both network operators and
   Internet applications.

   This document provides use cases where network operator and Internet
   application can be cooperative to improve video transmission
   efficiency, based on the fundamental traffic characteristics (e.g.
   frame priority, adaptive bit rate, etc.).

Requirements Language

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on January 9, 2017.

 

You                       Expires May 4, 2017                   [Page 1]
Internet-Draft              Video Transport             October 31, 2016

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2016 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
   (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
   publication of this document.  Please review these documents
   carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
   to this document.  Code Components extracted from this document must
   include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
   the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
   described in the Simplified BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  2
   2.  Terminology  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     2.1.  Abbreviations and acronyms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  3
     2.2.  Definitions  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   3.  Limitation of Current Approaches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.1.  Content Agnostic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
     3.2.  Deep Packet Inspection (DPI) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  4
   4.  Use Cases for Video Cooperation Transport  . . . . . . . . . .  4
     4.1.  Video Service Experience Evaluation  . . . . . . . . . . .  4
       4.1.1.  Problem Statement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  5
       4.1.2.  Information Exposed  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       4.1.3.  Privacy Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
     4.2.  Intelligent Packet Dropping  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  6
       4.2.1.  Problem Statement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.2.2.  Information Exposed  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  7
       4.2.3.  Privacy Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
     4.3.  Network Congestion State Feedback  . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.3.1.  Problem Statement  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  8
       4.3.2.  Information Exposed  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
       4.3.3.  Privacy Impact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   5.  Security Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   6.  IANA Considerations  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  9
   7.  References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     7.1.  Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
     7.2.  Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
   Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

1.  Introduction
Show full document text