On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 2:32 PM, Michael Welzl <michawe@ifi.uio.no> wrote:

On Apr 20, 2012, at 2:23 PM, Jim Gettys wrote:

On 04/20/2012 07:55 AM, Mirja Kuehlewind wrote:
Hi Randell,

I didn't follow the whole discussion but regarding LEDBAT we have a TARGET
delay of max. 100ms. That means you can choose a smaller one. We've chosen
100ms as a max as there is an ITU recommendation that 150 ms delay is
acceptable for most user voice applications and we wanted for sure stay below
that.

100 ms + 75ms speed of light delay across the US (or equivalent across
Europe, for example) + 100ms at the receiving end....

Of course, it's even worse between continents, even without broken networks.

Not so nice....

Not argueing about your point here (I agree that we have to fix the edge), but: LEDBAT is an end-to-end mechanism, so I think that the 100ms reflect the total measured end-to-end delay.

Is this really the case? I interpret that the target (100 ms) refers to queueing delay, since LEDBAT tries to minimize target - queueing_delay, where queueing_delay = current_delay - base_delay. Could be wrong though.
 

Cheers,
Michael


_______________________________________________
Rtp-congestion mailing list
Rtp-congestion@alvestrand.no
http://www.alvestrand.no/mailman/listinfo/rtp-congestion