W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > September 2013

Re: [Bug 15861] API for JS interaction with congestion control

From: Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 11:56:41 +0530
Message-ID: <CAGW1TF6-HxvvJEXfBa+v0yhwubA5BSL1UvbE9yt2UEO+YaOo3w@mail.gmail.com>
To: bugzilla <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Cc: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
(Adding bugzill sorry for spamming)

But timer for these constraints were not specified anywhere in the spec.
We had a discussion some time back on the same regarding the importance of
timers [1], and folks agreed on it too [2].
And this type of timers may be used not only for the bit-rate or bandwidth
fencing but also for other cases where a similar kind of problem may arise.

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2013Jul/0593.html

[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2013Jul/0600.html

Thanks,
Kiran.


On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Kiran Kumar <g.kiranreddy4u@gmail.com>wrote:

>
> But timer for these constraints were not specified anywhere in the spec.
> We had a discussion some time back on the same regarding the importance of
> timers [1], and folks agreed on it too [2].
> And this type of timers may be used not only for the bit-rate or bandwidth
> fencing but also for other cases where a similar kind of problem may arise.
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2013Jul/0593.html
>
> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2013Jul/0600.html
>
> Thanks,
> Kiran.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 10:44 AM, <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org> wrote:
>
>> https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=15861
>>
>> Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com> changed:
>>
>>            What    |Removed                     |Added
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>                  CC|                            |
>> adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com
>>
>> --- Comment #7 from Adam Bergkvist <adam.bergkvist@ericsson.com> ---
>> (In reply to comment #6)
>> > [...]
>> > This approach is not specific to congestion control. It can be applied
>> to
>> > all other constraints as well.
>>
>> The general mechanism you describe here is pretty much how our current
>> constraint approach work (as far as I understand it).
>>
>> A "fence conditions" is represented by a MinMaxConstraint object [1]. The
>> script will be notified when the browser cannot stay within the fence via
>> the
>> "overconstrained" event [2].
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html#idl-def-MinMaxConstraint
>>
>> [2]
>>
>> http://dev.w3.org/2011/webrtc/editor/getusermedia.html#event-mediastreamtrack-overconstrained
>>
>> --
>> You are receiving this mail because:
>> You are on the CC list for the bug.
>> You are the assignee for the bug.
>>
>>
>
Received on Wednesday, 4 September 2013 06:27:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:35 UTC