On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 8:03 AM, Jim Gettys <jg@freedesktop.org> wrote:
But espousing it in my mail was going to obscure the point I was really trying to drive home: that the queueing delays are so huge, that even when *ignoring* all the rest of the latency budget, that we really have to fix the queueing delays, as they by themselves are badly unacceptable. We have to do away with the uncontrolled, fixed (usually grossly bloated) sized, single queued, edge devices currently in the Internet. And that implies both fancy queuing and AQM that can handle (often hugely variable) bandwidths we now see in the edge.
Exactly my earlier point. In the above "we" means the IETF and the rest of the Internet community. We (RTPweb) can't fix this problem because it is way out of scope for the WG. There are some paths that don't have excess delay or jitter, either because they are under loaded or because "fancy queuing" is present and properly configured. RTCweb must define it's scope to deliver the best possible quality over these healthy links. For links with excess delay and or delay jitter, the best we can do is report the problem, and choose a rate that doesn't make the suckage too much worse. But in a fundamental way we (RTPweb) can't directly fix the problem. To the extent that RTCweb based applications diagnose delay and jitter problems, they will bring market pressure to bear on the bigger problem, so that perhaps it will get fixed. Thanks, --MM-- The best way to predict the future is to create it. - Alan Kay