IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [codec] I-D Action: draft-ietf-codec-oggopus-11.txt

Mark Harris <mark.hsj@gmail.com> Fri, 29 January 2016 09:16 UTC

Return-Path: <markh.sj@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2721A1BB3 for <codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:16:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id tJcV375s6Bag for <codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:15:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x22d.google.com (mail-io0-x22d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22d]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 59BB81A1B84 for <codec@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:15:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-x22d.google.com with SMTP id f81so82889794iof.0 for <codec@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:15:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=JB0qWb64vJHc747kj8QkVx3Ggzpmzfza+L5NcMqICYw=; b=eeWwRFMPlafE4Jq9KBgvrBevUHwpOJoDDdPZxMcIAae5T9ZzaAlspyawmZKypBLNAO 0BvP4DUQ6wc0/JVNhmfGpxrvvg6xA/XDZI9jJtp0D9BgRX3K93RCrTGhYA90HZEbKaGg EVOc4bLkE3sLPVOcTb9vvJK2YUY6THwIj7nvhGINtDynqTwJKVdtF1EXBY3aghE+Wbj0 ZOx+DlhzkvXButF+7TD2G26iFx6N/4jnGlK/pyOa9NoJA3Mn4U3jFNcR2p4dbB/B5Z6t mmmwp0Gdx3gS1J/tWaIuTe7v14zqayqUQ2UpUFyzMofZTzMfsFTE70d7h7lowGm/SFDI 1yeg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=JB0qWb64vJHc747kj8QkVx3Ggzpmzfza+L5NcMqICYw=; b=ZPhdqJhJX9x0p7hoYClh28AmhpJNxVIYOshc63m2X7lPZ6JX23aCW2azdlSsZwVeuF Vr/MF55pf9331cwym+wJ1A3QrwzO+1WxVe+61eSTLVimJK4H5Lqo0Ka49fUbH1UaEAFH yNoMSFI0ShzNArCWZAB6HiD3R+6dbKlKpididFxBNltgEf1+aCWVqLNUH3Z/ZM0bQrYK LIOZaCr5fB9l3vKTJO8JeroPPzBHlV0bFkpzp6Zvg1iU5oRAnNvi6VLUwmMey8cxPnWj rqtP5XIscE3x29g4XR5rfELjqly/33JgkwngHwdJiKAcICcXyiBRmldy9YZ1fR0wxfSi ZU4Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOTPb8dMh/EA2GbQSp43rFFOHjCksCpD8G3sPinITLhlZcgaTFkvfjPOHqDBarYsyDdE8HsC1DFZgzpoEQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.40.148 with SMTP id o142mr9165194ioo.18.1454058957811; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:15:57 -0800 (PST)
Sender: markh.sj@gmail.com
Received: by 10.107.17.158 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:15:57 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20160128183904.8076.80585.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
References: <20160128183904.8076.80585.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 01:15:57 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: bD0Nux8N96HAUTvQIKTTU-Z_1bQ
Message-ID: <CAMdZqKFApRv390i-J0=j5on2RA3Sn6__wX=VDqtux0ETtz4thw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Mark Harris <mark.hsj@gmail.com>
To: "codec@ietf.org" <codec@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/codec/RAfENOl8171q0UsOlFtD9RpmYXI>
Subject: Re: [codec] I-D Action: draft-ietf-codec-oggopus-11.txt
X-BeenThere: codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec WG <codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/codec>, <mailto:codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Fri, 29 Jan 2016 09:16:00 -0000

I see a minor issue with a change in the new version -11 of this draft.
This version of the draft changes:

    "It is possible to run an Opus decoder at other sampling rates,
but the value in the granule position field always counts samples
assuming a 48 kHz decoding rate ..."

to:

    "It is possible to run an Opus decoder at other sampling rates,
but all of them evenly divide 48 kHz.  Therefore, the value in the
granule position field always counts samples assuming a 48 kHz
decoding rate ..."

Although the reference decoder can only decode at sampling rates that
evenly divide 48 kHz, this change inaccurately implies that it is not
possible to write an Opus decoder that decodes at another rate.  How
about this wording:

    It is possible to run an Opus decoder at other sampling rates, but
a sampling rate of 48 kHz is sufficient to capture the full audio
bandwidth of any Opus packet.  Therefore, the value in the granule
position field always counts samples assuming a 48 kHz decoding rate
...

 - Mark

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email