Draft: draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons

Commentary: Merged after discussion with ... 
 This was a brillant ideq , and has worked in other groups , but I ca n't remember any contribution that was made using this template ... 
 We should probably talk about how to update This document aims to provide a taxonomy of networking issues as they relate to quality of experience in internet video delivery . The focus is on capturing characteristics of video delivery that have surprised network designers or transport experts without specific video expertise , since these highlight key differences between common assumptions in existing networking documents and observations of video delivery issues in practice . might suggest this ( but did n't put it in -05 ): This document focuses is on capturing characteristics of video delivery that have surprised network designers or transport experts without specific video expertise , since these highlight key differences between common assumptions in existing networking documents and observations of video delivery issues in practice . Thoughts from or 
 Sure , that works for me .
Paragraph (version A):
This document aims to provide a taxonomy of networking issues as they
relate to quality of experience in internet video delivery.  The
focus is on capturing characteristics of video delivery that have
surprised network designers or transport experts without specific
video expertise, since these highlight key differences between common
assumptions in existing networking documents and observations of
video delivery issues in practice.
Paragraph (version A):
Making specific recommendations for mitigating these issues is out of
scope, though some existing mitigations are mentioned in passing.
The intent is to provide a point of reference for future solution
proposals to use in describing how new technologies address or avoid
these existing observed problems.
Paragraph (version B):
This document examines networking issues as they relate to quality of
experience in internet video delivery.  The focus is on capturing
capturing characteristics of video delivery that have surprised
network designers or transport experts without specific video
expertise, since these highlight key differences between common
assumptions in existing networking documents and observations of
video delivery issues in practice.
Paragraph (version B):
Making specific recommendations on operational practices aimed at
mitigating these issues is out of scope, though some existing
mitigations are mentioned in passing.  The intent is to provide a
point of reference for future solution proposals to use in describing
how new technologies address or avoid these existing observed
problems.
Paragraph (version A):
Contributions are solicited regarding issues and considerations that
have an impact on media streaming operations.
Paragraph (version A):
Contributions can be emailed to mops@ietf.org, submitted as issues to
the issue tracker of the repository in venue, or emailed to the
document authors at draft-ietf-mops-streaming-opcons@ietf.org.
Paragraph (version A):
an overview of the issue's known prevalence in practice.  pointers
to write-ups of high-profile incidents are a plus.
Paragraph (version A):
an overview of the tradeoffs involved-how and why it's
helpful, what it costs.
Paragraph (version A):
Here are a few common resolutions used for video content, with
typical ranges of bitrate for the two most popular video codecs
Encodings.
Paragraph (version B):
Here are a few common resolutions used for video content, with
typical ranges of bitrates for the two most popular video codecs
Encodings.