- From: Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com>
- Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 05:27:58 +0000
- To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
- CC: "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
I would be fine with defining *two* experimental priorities of say parameters.encodings[0].qosPriority = parameters.encodings[0].bandwidthPriority = but if don't think the experiment can redefine parameters.encodings[0].priority = to mean something different than in means in the non experiment case. That would become an X- prefix problem for turning off the experiment. ( as a side note, network priority seems like a name that could cause confusion) ( Just to be 100% clear, this is send with my contributors to WebRTC hat on an no others ) > On Nov 28, 2017, at 10:15 AM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote: > > Picking up on a post-Singapore action item: > > I've written a very short (VERY short) spec for an extension to > webrtc-pc that allows one to control the setting of packet-level > priority separate from queue-management priority. > > This is at https://github.com/alvestrand/webrtc-dscp-exp > > Best starting point is probably the explainer: > > https://github.com/alvestrand/webrtc-dscp-exp/blob/master/explainer.md > > > The question now is - what now? > > Possible actions include adopting this in the WG, asking for adoption as > a WICG spec, or keeping it as an individual contribution. > > > What do people prefer? > > > Harald > > >
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2017 05:28:32 UTC