W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > July 2015

Re: I made a PR for changing RtpEncodingParameters.priority to an enum.

From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2015 13:00:16 +0000
To: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Message-ID: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B342075D2@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
On 24/07/15 14:44, Peter Thatcher wrote:
> Following the PR from https://github.com/w3c/webrtc-pc/pull/228, I have
> changed RtpEncodingParameters.priority to an enum with very-low, low,
> medium, and high.
>
> This is kind of what we decided a long ago about priorities.  But I
> forgot about it when I wrote the PR for RtpEncodingParameters.priority
> and made it a double.  This is an update to that.
>
>
> Do we still have consensus for using an enum for priority?  Look at the
> PR to see how it looks.

Which PR is it? Priority seems to be part of #234 and #241.

Anyway, I have concerns with the part

           <dt>double priority</dt>
+          <dd>
+            <p>
+              Indicates the relative priority of this encoding, across
+              all RtpSenders of a given PeerConnection.  When there is
+              limited bandwidth available to a PeerConnection, higher
+              prioirty encodings will be sent with more bandwidth, and
+              lower priority encodings will be sent with less
+              bandwidth.

in combination with the upcoming "min" and "max" bitrate attributes. How 
should he UA act if they conflict (e.g. a very high "min" and a low 
priority)?

#228 only points at RTCWEB-TRANSPORT and I think that document only 
talks about DSCP marking.

Stefan
Received on Friday, 24 July 2015 13:00:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 23 October 2017 15:19:45 UTC