|
Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-avtext-lrr-05
2017-06-13 11:13:53
Hi, Roni —
You seem to be assuming that a refresh and an upgrade are two different
actions. That’s not the intention — a refresh is a characteristic of a stream
that allows a decoder to upgrade.
I’ll try to draft some text that makes it clear that it’s possible either to
independently upgrade temporal or spatial, or else upgrade both at once.
On Jun 11, 2017, at 7:20 AM, Roni Even
<roni(_dot_)even(_at_)huawei(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
I assume the new text you propose is
"When C is 1, TTID MUST NOT be less than CTID, and TLID MUST NOT be
less than CLID; at least one of TTID or TLID MUST be greater than
CTID or CLID respectively. That is to say, the target layer index
<TTID, TLID> MUST be a layer upgrade from the current layer index
<CTID, CLID>. A sender MAY request an upgrade in both temporal and
spatial/quality layers simultaneously."
I think that this text still only implies the behavior, also the current text
talks about upgrade but I assume it is also for a refresh not only to upgrade
Maybe " A sender MAY request an upgrade or refresh in both temporal and
spatial/quality layers simultaneously by either having C =1 or by having
both CLID and CTID with lower values then TTID and TLID. If the sender want
to upgrade or refresh only one layer then C MUST be equal to 1 and only the
CTID or the CLID of the layer to be upgraded or refreshed should be lower
than the TTID or TLID respectively "
Roni
-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Lennox [mailto:jonathan(_at_)vidyo(_dot_)com]
Sent: יום ד 07 יוני 2017 18:30
To: Roni Even
Cc: Roni Even; draft-ietf-avtext-lrr(_dot_)all(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; General
Area Review Team;
avtext(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: Genart last call review of draft-ietf-avtext-lrr-05
On Jun 7, 2017, at 1:15 AM, Roni Even
<roni(_dot_)even(_at_)huawei(_dot_)com> wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
I did not see the text you added yet as a response to my first
question So to better clarify my question . If the FCI has TTID=0 and
TLID=2 .
does it mean that it is a request to update both?
This was also the reason for the question about both TTID=0 and TLID=0,
which layer need update or is it both?
Can you say that you want just to update temporal or spatial?
Yes, if the FCI has TTID=0 and TLID=2, it’s a request to update both layers —
or more specifically, to make sure that you can start decoding the substream
with TTID=0 and TLID=2. (For most scalability structures this would mean
updating both, but exotic structures are possible.)
If you want to just update one part of the stream, that’s what CTID and CLID
are for. If you sent TTID=0 and TLID=2, accompanied by CTID=0 and CLID=0,
that means that you already have TID 0, and you just want to increase the
LID.
The current text is at https://github.com/juberti/draughts/tree/master/lrr ,
if you want to take a look at the latest revisions, or suggest text that you
think would make it cleaner.
Roni
-----Original Message-----
From: Gen-art [mailto:gen-art-bounces(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org] On Behalf Of
Jonathan
Lennox
Sent: יום ד 07 יוני 2017 00:30
To: Roni Even
Cc: draft-ietf-avtext-lrr(_dot_)all(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; General Area
Review Team;
avtext(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org; ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Genart last call review of
draft-ietf-avtext-lrr-05
Hi, Roni — thanks for your review. Responses inline.
On Jun 1, 2017, at 2:53 AM, Roni Even
<ron(_dot_)even(_dot_)tlv(_at_)gmail(_dot_)com> wrote:
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review result: Ready with Issues
I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed by
the IESG for the IETF Chair. Please treat these comments just like
any other last call comments.
For more information, please see the FAQ at
<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
Document: draft-ietf-avtext-lrr-??
Reviewer: Roni Even
Review Date: 2017-05-31
IETF LC End Date: 2017-06-08
IESG Telechat date: Not scheduled for a telechat
Summary:
The document is ready with issues for a standard track RFC Major
issues:
Minor issues:
1. Can you specify both TTID and TLID in the same FCI.
Syntactically, they must both occur.
If you mean can you request an upgrade in both at once, yes; I’ve
added text to clarify this.
2. What is the meaning of value 0 for TTID and TLID - TID or LID =0
in frame marking draft means base layer if there is scalability.
This relates to the previous question.
I’m not sure I understand this question.
I’ve added text that if C=1, at least one of <TTID, TLID> MUST be
greater than <CTID, CLID>, and both MUST be greater than or equal to
their counterpart, so the LRR is actually requesting a layer upgrade.
Is that what you were asking about?
3. What would an FCI with both TTID and TLID equal 0 mean.
It means you want a refresh of the base temporal/spatial layer, only.
Nits/editorial comments:
1. Section 3 "an Real-Time Transport Control Protocol" should be "a
Real…".
Colin pointed out that it should say “an RTP Control Protocol” anyway.
2. In section 3 " [RFC5104](Section 3.5.1)" there is a link to
section
3.5.1 but it does not work.
xml2rfc doesn’t have any way to link to sections of other documents,
so the “(Section 3.5.1)” part is just a comment.
I think the internet-draft tooling may have thought I was trying to
link to a non-existent section 3.5.1 of this document, but that’s outside
my control.
3. In section 3.2 "(see section Section 2.1)" section appears twice.
Fixed.
_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
|
|