Re: A very short extension spec: DSCP codepoint control

On 29/11/17 11:00, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> No - setParameters is called once in both cases.

Got it. The spec says:

'If networkPriority is unset, the DSCP markings of the generated packets 
are controlled by the priority member.'

But networkPriority has a default ("low"), can you then really say it is 
unset?

> 
> Den 29. november 2017 10:41:24 CET, skrev "Stefan Håkansson LK" <stefan.lk
> <http://stefan.lk>.hakansson@ericsson.com>:
> 
>      On 28/11/17 18:20, Harald Alvestrand 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
> 
> 
>      for my understanding (looking at the examples), is it right that the
>      order you do things in matter, i.e.
> 
>      pc = new RTCPeerConnection();
>      sender1 = pc.addTrack(track1);
>      sender2 = pc.addTrack(track2);
>      parameters = await sender1.getParameters();
>      parameters.encodings[0].priority = "high";
>      parameters.encodings[0].networkPriority = "low";
>      sender1.encodingParameters.setParameters(parameters);
> 
>      would give "low" networkPriority while
> 
>      pc = new RTCPeerConnection();
>      sender1 = pc.addTrack(track1);
>      sender2 = pc.addTrack(track2);
>      parameters = await sender1.getParameters();
>      parameters.encodings[0].networkPriority = "low";
>      parameters.encodings[0].priority = "high";
>      sender1.encodingParameters.setParameters(parameters);
> 
>      would give "high" networkPriority (since .priority = "high" overrides)?
> 
> 
> 
>          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
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
>

Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2017 11:18:43 UTC