W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webrtc@w3.org > November 2017

Re: A very short extension spec: DSCP codepoint control

From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2017 13:00:27 +0100
To: public-webrtc@w3.org
Message-ID: <b4a37ba6-5f78-9858-7390-64ad8abe57b1@alvestrand.no>
Note: I messed up the IDL - I had specified a default, even though the
text specified behavior "if it is unset".

Now fixed. Sorry for the confusion caused!

On 11/29/2017 12:38 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> On 11/29/2017 12:18 PM, Stefan HÃ¥kansson LK wrote:
>> 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?
> I realized that for this to work, networkPriority has to be nullable (no
> default), so it doesn't have one.
>
>>> Den 29. november 2017 10:41:24 CET, skrev "Stefan HÃ¥kansson 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.
>>>

-- 
Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
Received on Wednesday, 29 November 2017 12:00:57 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 29 November 2017 12:00:57 UTC