- From: Hutton, Andrew <andrew.hutton@siemens-enterprise.com>
- Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:41:18 +0000
- To: Stefan Hakansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
- CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Hi Stefan, Ok having thought about your response and consulted some colleagues I think the snapshot will suffice at present. Regards Andy > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Hakansson LK [mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com] > Sent: 19 September 2012 14:09 > To: Hutton, Andrew > Cc: public-webrtc@w3.org > Subject: Re: Stats interface - Some comments on specific stats > > On 09/19/2012 10:49 AM, Hutton, Andrew wrote: > > Hi Stefan, > > > > Although a snapshot can be useful I think we should have the ability > > to get some overall stats without the application having to poll for > > it every few seconds. For example a simple application may just log > > the stats at the end of a session for retrieval if there is a > > complaint later from the user. > > I don't fully agree. I think the simple app will no use stats at all; > and once it gets a little more advanced it will be very simple for the > app developer to use setTimeout to get stats at a regular frequency and > do averaging and so on. > > Of course I have nothing against us defining many more metrics, but my > caution is that it will take use time to agree on what is needed and to > get it specced up and implemented - while perhaps snapshots would be > sufficient. > > Br, > Stefan > > > > > Regards Andy > > > >> -----Original Message----- From: Stefan Hakansson LK > >> [mailto:stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com] Sent: 17 September 2012 > >> 22:47 To: public-webrtc@w3.org Subject: Re: Stats interface - Some > >> comments on specific stats > >> > >> FWIW, > >> > >> when we've been working on stats, we've concluded that a simple > >> and often good enough strategy is to just report a snapshot. The > >> application can use several snapshots to get an estimate of > >> averages and so on. > >> > >> The risk of adding stuff is that it pretty quickly grows. Once you > >> add average, someone will be wanting min, max, variance, 95th > >> percentile, ...; or that the codec operated in mode X for the 37.6 > >> first percent of the period and then in mode Y for the next 13 > >> percent and so on. > >> > >> Stefan > >> > >> > >> On 09/17/2012 11:35 PM, Hutton, Andrew wrote: > >>> See below. > >>> > >>> Andy > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- From: Harald Alvestrand > >>>> [mailto:harald@alvestrand.no] Sent: 17 September 2012 19:13 > >>>> > >>>> On 09/17/2012 10:05 AM, Hutton, Andrew wrote: > >>>>> Hi Harald, > >>>>> > >>>>> Some comments/questions on the proposal regarding. > >>>>> > >>>>> 1) My understanding of the spec is that the application is in > >>>>> full > >>>> control of when to start/stop reporting, allowing the > >>>> application to collect periodic reports or for the complete > >>>> session. Can you > >> confirm > >>>> that the stats can be retrieved at the time the PeerConnection > >>>> ends. Yes, that is my intention. > >>>>> > >>>>> 2) RTT should be the average round trip time over the > >>>>> reporting > >>>> period can you confirm that this is the case. I don't think > >>>> this is right, since when RTT changes over the course > >> of > >>>> the call, you often want the current estimate, not the estimate > >>>> of > >> 10 > >>>> minutes ago. The RTT estimate should be the current value of > >>>> the > >> metric > >>>> defined in the relevant RFC. > >>> > >>> [AndyH] - Understood so maybe we need both. If the application > >>> is > >> gathering and logging stats at the end of session then it would > >> not want just the last RTT but an average for the session. > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 3) The number of Silence suppressions in the RTP stream in a > >>>> reporting period need to be included. What's a silence > >>>> suppression, and how do we count them? > >>> > >>> [AndyH] We need an indication how many periods of silence > >>> suppression > >> there has been during the session. How this is counted I > >> understand depends on the codec in use. For some codec's probably a > >> simply count of the RTP packets received with the marker bit set > >> would be ok. > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 4) "Jitter" implies maximum jitter in the reporting period, > >>>>> is this > >>>> correct? Again, I think this is the current value of the > >>>> relevant metric. If > >> we > >>>> want a max value, it's best to define a separate metric for > >>>> this. > >>> > >>> [AndyH] Probably we need something more than just the current > >>> value > >> again for the case when an application just logs stats for the > >> whole session when it ends. > >>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards Andy > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> -----Original Message----- From: Harald Alvestrand > >>>>>> [mailto:harald@alvestrand.no] Sent: 02 September 2012 > >>>>>> 08:45 To: public-webrtc@w3.org Subject: Re: Stats interface > >>>>>> - modelling on IndexedDB API? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Attaching the latest proposal after the changes. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On 08/30/2012 01:03 PM, Stefan Hakansson LK wrote: > >>>>>>> On 08/30/2012 12:53 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote: > >>>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> when implementing the Stats interface, I've concluded > >>>>>>>> that it's > >>>> not > >>>>>>>> quite trivial to do it the way I'd written it up, due > >>>>>>>> to the way > >>>>>> WebKit > >>>>>>>> hangs together. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Would anyone mind terribly if I changed it around to do > >>>>>>>> it the > >> way > >>>>>> the > >>>>>>>> IndexedDB API does it? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Basically, it seems to be: > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> - Request returns a "request object" with a status and > >>>>>>>> a result - When the data is ready, it fires a "success" > >>>>>>>> event at the > >>>> request > >>>>>>>> object - The caller can then read the data out from the > >>>>>>>> request object > >>>>>>> I think the new approach you propose is better than the > >>>>>>> old one. > >> It > >>>>>>> aligns with e.g. IndexDB and FileReader. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> http://www.w3.org/TR/IndexedDB/#idl-def-IDBRequest > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Seems a bit easier to get threaded through WebKit than > >>>>>>>> the > >>>> "simpler" > >>>>>>>> method of "just" returning a complex structure in a > >>>>>>>> callback. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Harald > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >
Received on Wednesday, 19 September 2012 18:41:47 UTC