On 11/2/15 4:17 PM, Adrian Farrel wrote: > Oh OK. > So there is a test for quality in advance, and if you fail the test you go right > ahead and present anyway? positive action would be required on the part of the remote participant if the connectivity is an issue on that end. there is certianly potent for problems with the IETF network last mile but we're doing ok right now. > Is that possibly broken? > >> I asked the meetecho folks about the presentation that we both saw fail and >> they said they saw the same issues during a test with the presentor. >> >> Perhaps we also need a high loss tollerant codec available for such cases. >> Of course the added latency is likely to make interaction cumbersome, but >> better than the complete failure we both witnessed -- where apparently the >> presentor was told it wasn't join to work, but only had the option of >> hoping his access link would (magically) improve. .. >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature