Minutes IETF102: avtcore
minutes-102-avtcore-00

Audio/Video Transport Core Maintenance (avtcore) Working Group

======================================================
CHAIRS:  Jonathan Lennox       <jonathan@vidyo.com>
          Rachel Huang         <rachel.huang@huawei.com>

AGENDA

Monday, 16 July 2018 at 15:50-17:50 (Zurich A)
-------------------------------------------------

1. Note Well, Note Takers, Agenda Bashing - (Chairs, 15:50, 5 min)

Note takers: Timothy Terriberry
Jabber: Magnus Westerlund

   Status of working group drafts:

      draft-ietf-avtcore-multi-media-rtp-session-13
      draft-ietf-avtcore-rtp-multi-stream-optimisation-12
      draft-ietf-avtext-rid-09
      draft-ietf-avtext-lrr-07
            [RFC Editor Queue: MISSREF: Bundle]

      draft-ietf-avtcore-mprtp
         Will check on the mailing list. If nobody cares, remove from milestone.

      draft-ietf-avtext-framemarking-06
         The droping ratio issu is agreed to be irrelevant with frame marking
         draft. Authors need to respond the comments from WGLC, and submit a
         new version to address them.

2. RMCAT Feedback Message Work Status (Colin Perkins, 15:55, 20 min)
   draft-ietf-avtcore-cc-feedback-message-02

- juberti asked how this differs from the draft-holmberg feedback format
  + Suggested working group put weight behind one message format
    * This is a WG draft and the others never progressed beyond individual
    drafts, so this is that format

- baboba asked for compelling reason to implement
  + cperkins says that this fits with the way RTP does sequence numbers better,
  so it is more future proof

- halvestrand says the last time he asked his team, converting to the new
format will not be hard, and if more browsers are generating feedback in this
format than the one that Chrome is using, then Chrome will be happier

- nohlmeier: we never implemented the old non-standard one, so we think we
should implement the standard one
  + baboba: No, you'll have to do both, because the old one is already deployed
  and won't be upgraded
    * cjennings: Sort of disagree, you shipped for five years without
    implementing either

- juberti: if this is a natural evolution of our stuff, we can kind of look
into it and get back to you

- juberti: is there somewhere the benefits are written down?
  + cperkins: maybe in a previous meeting's minutes, benefits are:
    * Reports on ECN, other one doesn't
    * Handles SSRCs and sequence numbers better, so more future proof
    * Packets are smaller

  + juberti: any performance surprises because we no longer have the global
  sequence number?
    + cperkins/jlennox: no, you can recover the global loss fraction easily,
    and the more fine-grained information is there if you can make use of it

3. Multiplexing guidelines (Magnus, 16:15, 20 min)

- No comments from WG on open issues
- mwesterlund: next version before bangkok

4. Frame Priority Marking RTP Header Extension  (Roni Even, 16:35, 20 min)

- jlennox: do you have people outside of Huawei interested in this work?
  + reven: we're doing this internally

- jlennox: we're going to defer this until frame marking is done

5. Next steps and open mic - (Chairs, 16:55, 5 min)

- mzanaty: Lot of changes to frame marking draft based on feedback
  + reven: I will do another WG last call
    * bcampbell (AD hat on): last time feedback came in slowly, please turn
    this around quickly

- reven (payload): one more draft in WGLC
  + jlennox: and juberti and I owe you VP9