W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > June 2012

Re: Target numbers for setup time (Re: Keeping up data channel)

From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jun 2012 19:49:09 +0000
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>, "<rtcweb@ietf.org>" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <8F1A4041-E7E8-49D4-A77B-EDFF1F5A617C@cisco.com>

Agree - that's why I think this has to be done in zero RTT. I don't see any problem with setting up a data channel and being ready to send media before having the UI tell the user they are "connected and can start talking".

Reducing from 7 RTT to 5 RTT does not help when you need to get to 0 RTT.

On Jun 22, 2012, at 10:09 , Harald Alvestrand wrote:

> On 06/22/2012 05:58 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) wrote:
>> On Jun 13, 2012, at 5:29 , Randell Jesup wrote:
>> 
>>>> How far down do you think we have to drive the setup time before you
>>>> would not call it "abysmal"?
>> 
>> I'd probably consider above 250 ms abysmal but good news I don't see any problem with getting it down around 100 ms in when both endpoints are in a single country.
>> 
> Coast-to-coast US is ~4800 km, so RTT (9600 km) is 32 ms (speed of light is 300 km/msec).
> 
> So, without considering processing time, 3 RTT is 100 msec, 7 RTT is "abysmal".
> 
> There are bigger countries than the US, but this will do for a back-of-the-envelope.
> 
> 
>> 
> 
> 
Received on Thursday, 28 June 2012 19:49:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:28 UTC