Subject: [avtext] Barry Leiba's No Objection on draft-ietf-avtext-rtp-stream-pause-08: (with COMMENT)

From: "Barry Leiba" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 12:37:30 -0700

Barry Leiba has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-avtext-rtp-stream-pause-08: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-avtext-rtp-stream-pause/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I have a meta-question about why this "updates" 5104.  It appears to be
an extension to 5104, using normal extension mechanisms -- someone
implementing 5104 and not intending to implement this would have no
reason to look at this document, as far as I can tell.  I don't see
anything that describes a *change* to 5104 (though perhaps I've missed
it).  What's the reasoning behind specifying "updates"?

---

From: Magnus Westerlund <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 14:29:56 +0200

The reason this documents Updates RFC5104 is that it clarifies that the 
TMMBR message that is defined in 5104 can also be used for pause if one 
sets bandwidth to 0. This is important to know also for anyone not 
intending to implement PAUSE and Resume semantics.

I realize that this is not clearly stated in the introduction. Perhaps 
something we should address by adding a sentence or two to this 
paragraph from Section 1.

    The Temporary Maximum Media Bitrate Request (TMMBR) message of CCM is
    used by video conferencing systems for flow control.  It is desirable
    to be able to use that method with a bitrate value of zero for pause,
    whenever possible.

Cheers

Magnus Westerlund

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Services, Media and Network features, Ericsson Research EAB/TXM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ericsson AB                 | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                 | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden | mailto: [email-masked]
----------------------------------------------------------------------

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 2015 09:08:59 -0400

Hi, Magnus; thanks for the response and explanation.  Yes, adding a
sentence to that paragraph would be good, along the line of "This
updates RFC 5104 to add the new Pause and Resume semantics to the
TMMBR message."  Minor thing, though... if you think it's clear enough
as it is, I'm not worried further.

Barry

On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 8:29 AM, Magnus Westerlund
<[email-masked]> wrote:
> TMMBR message that is defined in 5104 can also be used for pause if one sets
> bandwidth to 0. This is important to know also for anyone not intending to
> implement PAUSE and Resume semantics.
>
> something we should address by adding a sentence or two to this paragraph
> from Section 1.
>