Re: [Last-Call] Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-10

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi, Linda, 

On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 12:29 PM Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Spencer,

 

I find it is very difficult to see where the resolution to my comments are from the Github: Resolve issue 149 by SpencerDawkins · Pull Request #160 · ietf-wg-mops/draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons (github.com)

 

Is it the Pink color sentences? Or green highlighted sentences? What is the resolution?


The pink on the left is the text that was changed. The green on the right is what the text looks like after this PR is merged. 
 

Are they specific to my comments? Or to a group of comments?


You correctly pointed out that the document used the word "link" very loosely, so there are other places in the document where occurrences of "link" were made more precise. 

There is one additional change (XML2RFC allows you to say which stream your document is for (we said "IETF", and I included that in the PR..

Does that help?

Best,

Spencer




 

Linda

 

From: Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@xxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2022 6:41 PM
To: Linda Dunbar <linda.dunbar@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: ops-dir@xxxxxxxx; draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons.all@xxxxxxxx; last-call@xxxxxxxx; MOPS Working Group <mops@xxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Opsdir last call review of draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons-10

 

Hi, Linda, 

 

Thank you for the review. 

 

 

 

Please let us know if you have any questions.

 

Best,

 

Spencer

 

On Fri, May 6, 2022 at 10:54 PM Linda Dunbar via Datatracker <noreply@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Reviewer: Linda Dunbar
Review result: Has Nits

I have reviewed this document as part of the Ops area directorate's ongoing
effort to review all IETF documents being processed by the IESG.  These
comments were written primarily for the benefit of the Ops area directors.
Document editors and WG chairs should treat these comments just like any other
last-call comments.

Summary: the document describes many issues associated with streaming video.
The description is very clear and it is very useful to have those problems
documented.

Some questions for the description of Section 3.2
 The first bullet describes the Media server's adjusting bandwidth in
 responding to the application-level feedback that indicates a bottleneck link
 somewhere along the path.

Question 1: is the "Link" in the sentence referring to the physical link
between two routers along the path? How can application know the all the links
along the path from the server to itself? let alone detecting which link is the
bottleneck?

 The second bullet describes the Media servers adjusting bandwidth by
 implementing some forms of congestion control that probe for bandwidth.
The conclusion says that the QoE is poorer when the two methods don't
coordinate.

Question 2: Both methods are implemented on the Media server, they should
coordinate by nature, aren't they?

Thank you very much,
Linda Dunbar

-- 
last-call mailing list
last-call@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Mhonarc]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux