You wanna use MDI to measure media delivery over TCP? On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 7:18 PM, Qin Wu <[email protected]> wrote:
> We have customers using MDI to address new needs, such as > wifi performance measurement MDI falls short when measuring delivery of > streaming media over tcp, that is why we think it > should be extended. Yes, rtcp XR has its value. But I think > they could be complimentary. > > Sent from HUAWEI AnyOffice > *发件人： *Ali C. Begen > *收件人： *Qin Wu; > *抄送： *[email protected]; 郑辉; > *主题： *Re: Proposal for revising RFC4445 or make RFC4445bis > *时间： *2017-07-17 13:02:07 > > > I am really curious about who is using MDI anymore. Can you share data if > you have it? RTCP XR is still extensively used and for non-RTP, it is a > mixed of several things. > > -acbegen > > On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Qin Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, All: >> >> We like to get a sense of this idea, more than 10 years ago, at the time >> of RFC4445 writing, >> >> The popularity of delivery of streaming media over packet swtiched >> network has just began, >> >> not all implementations support QoS methods to improve media delivery. >> Many service >> >> delivery systems may compose the network with QoS support or without QoS >> support. This add difficulty on characterizing dynamic behavior of the >> network. >> >> >> >> 10 years have passed, we see most of widely deployed implementions have >> adopted various different QoS mechanisms >> >> such as diffserv Intserv, Traffic Engineering, providing QoS guarantee to >> improve delivery of media streaming, >> >> especially for time senestive or loss senstive application become a must; >> Therefore we see a lot of value of MDI defined in RFC4445 since it provide >> s a handy diagnostic tool for operators and service providers to measure >> the peformance of the network carrying streaming media and quickly identify >> fault in the network. >> >> >> >> Today we also see many service providers begain to offer on demand >> streaming media service, many operator deployed CDN in the last mile to >> provide better SLA, or provide hybrid TV service, in addition more and more >> real time application not limited to IPTV application, VOIP application >> have been developed,network monitoring and network troubleshooting began >> more and more complicated and costy. We hear a lot of operators get hurted >> and want to have a common tool to help them to measure performance in this >> kind of networks and provider better troubleshooting. >> >> >> >> Another observation is today more and more implementations have adopted >> packet loss repair methods to improve media delivery. >> >> However MDI defined in RFC4445 doesn't take into acount of various >> different packet loss repair mechanims, in addition, RFC4445 is only >> designed for monitoring MPEG Transport Stream (TS) packets over UDP and >> fall short to addressing needs in hybrid senarios or on demand streaming >> media scenarios. >> >> >> >> In addition, we see at the time of RFC4445 publication, IESG doesn't >> recommend this standard, mostly becos RFC4445 doesn't define complete >> Metric and clarify the relationship with existing IETF work such as RFC3611 >> and RFC3933, I am wondering if it is a good idea to revise RFC4445 to >> address IESG concern today and in addition fill new needs in today's >> service deployment. >> >> Comments and suggestions? >> >> >> >> -Qin >> > >
