Session Date/Time: 30 Mar 2023 07:30

wish

Summary

This meeting covered two main topics: an update on the working group charter discussion and updates on the "web" draft specification. The charter is being updated to reflect the broadening scope of the working group, while discussion on the "web" draft focused on adding server-side eventing and quality selection features and concerns about potentially conflicting with WebRTC's congestion control mechanisms.

Key Discussion Points

Charter Update: Sergio rewrote the charter draft, adding a reference to media players, removing references to specific old-day products and removing the statement that playback was outside the scope.
Charter Scope: Timothy expressed concern that the charter scope was too broad and needed constraints to avoid re-inventing existing solutions.
Charter Update Text: Timothy will provide proposed text for the charter update to address the scope concerns.
Media Play Draft Status: The "media play" draft completed working group last call and requires minor editorial fixes from pull requests submitted by Neil.
Shepherd Writeup: The shepherd writeup for "media play" is almost complete, with minor changes expected. Meals will share the draft with Sergio.
Web Draft Update: Sergio submitted a new version of the "web" draft, removing service-to-service communication and adding server-sent events for player-side quality selection.
Server Events and Quality Selection: Discussion centered on how clients would communicate their desired video quality (layer) to the server via HTTP POST to a URL.
Congestion Control: Julius raised concerns about servers overriding WebRTC congestion control when selecting a video quality lower than what the client requested. It was suggested the draft needs to give explicit permission to the server to do so.
Scalable Video Coding (SVC): Pan Bernard highlighted complexities with SVC, including dependencies between layers. The server may need to consider SVC dependencies when the client is making a request to switch layers.
Implementation Guidance: Participants discussed providing non-normative implementation guidance in the spec versus relying on implementation experience. While generally favorable, concerns were raised about endless debate on non-normative text.
Set Parameters Analogy: Pan Bernard suggested viewing layer selection as setting parameters on the server.

Decisions and Action Items

Timothy: Provide proposed text to refine the charter scope.
Joe: Merge Neil's pull requests for the "media play" draft and publish a new version.
Meals: Share the shepherd writeup for "media play" with Sergio.
Sergio: Add text to the "web" draft giving the server explicit permission to send a lower quality stream.
Sergio: Address scalability dependencies between media quality layers in the "web" draft and implementation guidance on those dependencies.

Next Steps

Complete the working group charter update process and adopt it.
Complete the IESG evaluation of the media player draft and publish as RFC.
Make a call for adoption on the web draft as a working group item.
Continue working on the final draft and protocol extension for "web".