Re: [codec] #1: Point to point calls supporting transcoding? (was: Application: 2.1. Point to point calls supporting transcoding?)
"codec issue tracker" <trac@tools.ietf.org> Sat, 10 April 2010 05:44 UTC
Return-Path: <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Original-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02E1C3A693F for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:44:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.547
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.053, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FmqOkTs57nYV for <codec@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:44:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zinfandel.tools.ietf.org (unknown [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::2a]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F62C3A6892 for <codec@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Apr 2010 22:44:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=zinfandel.tools.ietf.org) by zinfandel.tools.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <trac@tools.ietf.org>) id 1O0TUE-00025B-Eu; Fri, 09 Apr 2010 22:44:06 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
From: codec issue tracker <trac@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Version: 0.11.6
Precedence: bulk
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
X-Mailer: Trac 0.11.6, by Edgewall Software
To: hoene@uni-tuebingen.de
X-Trac-Project: codec
Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 05:44:06 -0000
X-URL: http://tools.ietf.org/codec/
X-Trac-Ticket-URL: http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/codec/trac/ticket/1#comment:2
Message-ID: <071.a8d36bcf3f790bf78b57601e3d83536e@tools.ietf.org>
References: <062.4b6a3862c443b2d8917e027f2267f4d2@tools.ietf.org>
X-Trac-Ticket-ID: 1
In-Reply-To: <062.4b6a3862c443b2d8917e027f2267f4d2@tools.ietf.org>
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: ::1
X-SA-Exim-Rcpt-To: hoene@uni-tuebingen.de, codec@ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: trac@tools.ietf.org
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zinfandel.tools.ietf.org); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: codec@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [codec] #1: Point to point calls supporting transcoding? (was: Application: 2.1. Point to point calls supporting transcoding?)
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Reply-To: trac@localhost.amsl.com
List-Id: Codec WG <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/codec>
List-Post: <mailto:codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 10 Apr 2010 05:44:20 -0000
#1: Point to point calls supporting transcoding? ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Reporter: hoene@… | Owner: Type: enhancement | Status: closed Priority: major | Milestone: Component: requirements | Version: Severity: Active WG Document | Resolution: fixed Keywords: | ------------------------------------+--------------------------------------- Changes (by hoene@…): * status: new => closed * resolution: => fixed Comment: Any testing of tandem coding can only be about the audio quality. There is no binary question about whether "it works" or not, because any two codecs do indeed work together when connected through audio. I don't see a need to add tandem testing to the requirements. Quality will be high when operating towards the high end of the range in bitrates mentioned in the requirements, and tandem quality will be limited by the other codec. For lower bitrates the quality naturally goes down.. not sure what to test? koen. Problem solved: If tandem coding is a quality problem, just add bandwidth on the side of the Internet codec. CH -- Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/codec/trac/ticket/1#comment:2> codec <http://tools.ietf.org/codec/>
- [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point call… codec issue tracker
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … James Rafferty
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Christian Hoene
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … James Rafferty
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Christian Hoene
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … James Rafferty
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Christian Hoene
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … James Rafferty
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … stephen botzko
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … James Rafferty
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Christian Hoene
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Michael Knappe
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … stephen botzko
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Marc Petit-Huguenin
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Michael Knappe
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Dr. Christian Hoene
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … codec issue tracker
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … stephen botzko
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Christian Hoene
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … stephen botzko
- Re: [codec] #1: Application: 2.1. Point to point … Koen Vos
- Re: [codec] #1: Point to point calls supporting t… codec issue tracker