Re: [codec] WGLC of draft-ietf-codec-opus-07

Jehan Pagès <> Sun, 24 July 2011 16:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id A53F721F88B7 for <>; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.299
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pIG9uAR-I7+S for <>; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:32:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DABA621F88B6 for <>; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by wwg11 with SMTP id 11so832103wwg.1 for <>; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:32:23 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=G1ruxn1ScEv8t9reHFY13iJXRDge6SqZAO8ZCY/oI+0=; b=al32jGks6LSg5DBW4ZFWI/AnjOqmkhlYBVKd7C4gEN3vQ2DJ7e+ERUnA20PEx5K37L YGH+WB35x05m4y34wt6A4BnjVfjwsMvPYeuTcBTAFAmsPl3eaz17MVhoGRB3RrPXWyyn BFqoYqOuiAISmH7uvy7aa5XPK6KZNpqED3T1g=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id f16mr729078wel.46.1311525142952; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Sun, 24 Jul 2011 09:32:22 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <000001cc49a3$328ed4a0$97ac7de0$>
References: <> <> <000001cc4920$4a72cb40$df5861c0$> <000001cc49a3$328ed4a0$97ac7de0$>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 01:32:22 +0900
Message-ID: <>
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jehan_Pag=E8s?= <>
To: Christian Hoene <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Re: [codec] WGLC of draft-ietf-codec-opus-07
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec WG <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 16:32:24 -0000


On Sun, Jul 24, 2011 at 10:44 AM, Christian Hoene
<> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> I went through the draft and parts of the source code and it seems that
>> is quite too early.

I skimmed through the draft, mainly because it is a complicated one
and am not really knowledgeable on codecs, especially when it came to
the encoding/decoding part with formulas and complicated algorithms
(thus I read the codec modes part more carefully, but the rest, I
would need dedicated days, that I don't have just now). So pardon me
for giving only very superficial bugs that I noticed. I figure that's
better than nothing.

* Section "3. Codec Modes" (page 11):
« For code 2 packets, the TOC byte is followed by a one or two byte
   sequence indicating the the length of the first frame (marked N1 in
   the figure below), followed by N1 bytes of compressed data for the
   first frame. »
=> there is a "the the" repetition.

* Just below, in the same paragraph:
   length of the first frame, N1, MUST be no larger than the size of the
   payload remaining after decoding that length for all code 2 packets.
=> I am not sure what it means? Aren't we simply telling that the
advertised length must not be larger than the actual length (which
appears logical to be by "definition" of "length")?

* At the beginning of section "4. Opus decoder", the little graph has
a block which says "SILK encoder". I think it was supposed to say
"SILK decoder", no?

>> Some text in the draft is hardly understandable if at all, the source code
>> has some (minor) bugs, and the codec supports things that should be done
> in
>> the payload such as frame and a feature called "padding".

Also probably a stupid question for someone new here, but I wondered:
what is exactly the role of padding? Is there an interest to have a
fixed size of packets on some platform for instance?

>> Does anybody beside me review the drafts or the code at all (I mean beside
>> the authors)?
>> More emails are to come or shall I use the track again. Hopefully, it
> would
> [Christian Hoene] not - really not -
>> take a year again to get the issues fixed.
>> Christian

That's all from me. Sorry for not being more helpful.