- From: Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2018 09:15:19 +0100
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
IMHO, there are two different discussions, what protection schemes should we use for media depending on type, rtt and packet loss type, and what RFC we use for retransmission. I agree with the conclusions of Varun's paper, and from my experience nack+retransmission works best in low rtt scenarios and other mechanisms are better on hi rtt or big packet loss burst happen. On 15/12/2018 2:29, Bernard Aboba wrote: > We should probably rexamine WebRTC robustness more systematically, because we can do quite a bit better than what is there now. > > IMHO, for Opus, RED applied judiciously outperforms Opus FEC (which cannot handle burst loss). > > For video, differential protection (e.g. RTX or FEC on base layer only) is more efficient than applying FEC or RTX to all bits. > >> On Dec 14, 2018, at 6:25 PM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote: >> >> >> I don’t know why we ever put RTX in WebRTC - it was clearly so suboptimal in RTP in general that we created much better things to replace it - like ULPFEC. I’d be in favor of removing it.
Received on Saturday, 15 December 2018 08:11:51 UTC