IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Mon, 04 January 2010 22:48 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
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 0A85C3A65A6; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 14:48:19 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none]
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 SQpOAnw3-Vi3; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 14:48:18 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pw0-f50.google.com (mail-pw0-f50.google.com [209.85.160.50]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 312E83A67EF; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 14:48:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by pwi20 with SMTP id 20so10357731pwi.29 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:48:08 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=q1nf0Exhw7Ch0y7fZM+sJADYQK3WEnUEHVkdQQbO4js=; b=nXpmwOpEaU1+L9K5psyRzPMEomlagSDH6fktUjOfzFDxS4uHHlrZ8nKRHY6dT0+7Fz fzMoiWJGBsz5CY+qEbn0KND0OQGrIiLJG4Uxuv3bHGQYHhy5+kPJ4HdPmDXg5K8dWzae 7opa940wsUI4zjnCTLanMph9VN+CNhtQpbUbE=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=JtBjMHUQ4yckWtm2zZ0BkYz+oJB505P0rJfCwNXoQDhTTKm7Qtcs699iHKNkTj12Ka Bmcu6AXLuMxmCHSnf08CbyGh0LUH0kdQH4JOgQ9RZrW8g+ez0T853JvphEm4yLIQ9bZN EMUlCAHL5V/nB9Td/hhA+UYKmdFvbH0r2fVI0=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.115.84.40 with SMTP id m40mr608538wal.192.1262645288485; Mon, 04 Jan 2010 14:48:08 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20100104214338.GF16373@besserwisser.org>
References: <4b33100a.01135e0a.2ab9.ffff8e9b@mx.google.com> <3D3C75174CB95F42AD6BCC56E5555B450204C143@FIESEXC015.nsn-intra.net> <20091223171501.7BAE33A697D@core3.amsl.com> <14093.1261593597@epsilon.noi.kre.to> <14853.1261600779@epsilon.noi.kre.to> <2401.1261648036@epsilon.noi.kre.to> <4b3373d7.02135e0a.241a.fffffb62@mx.google.com> <a123a5d60912241926l6f2255e3kc15d1d21573adeb9@mail.gmail.com> <B67FB114-FDA9-4431-A2E2-6ACF344B2EA7@cisco.com> <20100104214338.GF16373@besserwisser.org>
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 17:48:08 -0500
Message-ID: <a123a5d61001041448q7bead803h78ca0573aff452da@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Mans Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: codec@ietf.org, Patrik Fältström <paf@cisco.com>, iesg@ietf.org, kre@munnari.oz.au, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [codec] WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec)
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Should the IETF standardize wideband Internet codec\(s\)? " <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: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 22:48:19 -0000

I can see the motivation to pay big bucks for video codecs. Using
Mpeg4 can reduce your bandwidth costs and save real money. I can see
why there was a big incentive to save money on audio codecs in the
1990s.

At this point an audio codec is going to have to save a huge amount ot
bandwidth to be worth the hassle, let alone the cost of using
encumbered technology. A useful starting point would be to establish a
safe fallback using technology such a mu-law or a-law that nobody can
possibly claim they own without being referred to the reply given in
the famous case of Arkel vs. Pressdram.

The objective here is not necessarily to use mu-law as the default
codec (but I really don't think that is unthinkable as some have
suggested in the past), the objective is to reduce the bargaining
leverage of any possible patent troll from being able to demand the
economic value of the bandwideth saved by using their codec.


2010/1/4 Mans Nilsson <mansaxel@besserwisser.org>:
> Subject: Re: WG Review: Internet Wideband Audio Codec (codec) Date: Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 05:57:56PM +0100 Quoting Patrik Fältström (paf@cisco.com):
>> We actually already have done work in this area, RFC 3951.
>>
>> What I think you say is that it in the IETF is hard to do work starting with a white sheet of paper. And I agree with that. I do though think that is not something special for IETF as an SDO, and I do specifically not think that is specific for this kind of work.
>
>        (I'm answering both Patrik and Philip here)
>
> But we are not running out of proposals for codecs to adapt. Both CELT
> and SILK seem reasonable.
>
> The patent troll threat is a more sinister one, since a lot of revenue
> and lock-in is won by FUDing  people into buying unfree codecs --
> giving a lot of companies ample reason to fight this.
>
> The users need CODEC. The industry maybe does not, at least not the
> myopic parts of it. Do we build and document what the users need or
> what the industry orders?
>
> --
> Måns Nilsson     primary/secondary/besserwisser/machina
> MN-1334-RIPE                             +46 705 989668
> Jesuit priests are DATING CAREER DIPLOMATS!!
>



-- 
-- 
New Website: http://hallambaker.com/
View Quantum of Stupid podcasts, Tuesday and Thursday each week,
http://quantumofstupid.com/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email