Re: Real and Non-Real Time Traffic (was [WG-PIC:352] Re: FMM demo notes)

[Jon Zeeff <>]

> For now,
> outside of pathological environments where hundreds of people are
> sharing the ether, real-time applications with adaptive, loss-tolerant
> codecs work well.

Ether/ethernet - medium doesn't matter.
Such environments are very common and shouldn't be ignored.  There are places
that run with substantial packet loss all the time.  And they can't afford 
more bandwidth.

There are many more places that artificially constrict the pipes (eg, 10 
mbit ethernet or even 128k) to/from their users as a primitive attempt to 
reduce packet loss elsewhere.

"The VoIP call used an ITU-T G.711 codec, plus proprietary FEC encoding, 
plus RTP/UDP/IP framing."

 "proprietary" in the above quote bothers me.  Given that packet loss is a 
normal occurrence at
some point in an Internet connection, effective FEC should be standard.

> What worries me in the Internet2 environment are the non-adaptive
> video applications we are seeing that are not at all "small".

Agreed.  Same problem as voip but at data rates that are more likely to 
cause problems.

My concern is that non adaptive apps will start to use excessive FEC 
(because it works)
and all other apps will suffer.


---------------------------------------------------------------wg-voip-+
For list utilities, archives, subscribe, unsubscribe, etc. please visit the
ListProc web interface at 

   http://archives.internet2.edu/

---------------------------------------------------------------wg-voip--