300 ms (* bitrate) refers to the rate control buffer not coding latency. I think the testing draft should define low latency as zero frame delay, i.e. no reordering. The high latency condition can be unrestricted.
Mo (as individual) On Jul 21, 2015, at 6:28 PM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) <[email protected]> wrote: -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Daede Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 at 6:21 PM To: "Ali C. Begen", "[email protected]" Subject: Re: [video-codec] draft-filippov-netvc-requirements-01 > On 07/21/2015 06:14 PM, Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote: > >>>>> - All of the use cases should specify either a high latency or low >>>>> latency requirement. >>>> And where is the borderline? >>> >>> What is a borderline use case? I would much rather keep the number of >>> configurations as low as possible. >> >> I mean what is low latency vs high latency. And who decides that? > > It is defined in draft-daede-netvc-testing-01 [1]. And some of the > definition should probably be moved into the requirements draft, though > individual codec parameters still belong in the testing draft. > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-daede-netvc-testing/ I searched for latency and delay, nothing showed up. The only time related number seems to be 300ms in section 5.3. _______________________________________________ video-codec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec _______________________________________________ video-codec mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec
