Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband Audio Codec WG
"Slava Borilin" <Borilin@spiritdsp.com> Tue, 02 June 2009 15:08 UTC
Return-Path: <Borilin@spiritdsp.com>
X-Original-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 143AB28C257 for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 08:08:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.371
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.371 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-1.228, BAYES_00=-2.599, FRT_ADOBE2=2.455, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 RwTcNwXEV4D7 for <dispatch@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 08:08:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail3.spiritcorp.com (mail3.spiritcorp.com [85.13.194.167]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11FA028C19B for <dispatch@ietf.org>; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 08:08:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-srv.spiritcorp.com (mail-srv.spiritcorp.com [192.168.125.3]) by mail3.spiritcorp.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with SMTP id n52F7Z2u063597; Tue, 2 Jun 2009 19:07:36 +0400 (MSD) (envelope-from Borilin@spiritdsp.com)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C9E393.D8DC653C"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 19:07:28 +0400
Message-ID: <AA5A65FC22B6F145830AC0EAC7586A6C04BF905A@mail-srv.spiritcorp.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband Audio Codec WG
Thread-Index: AcnjPsupfF5mOurzS56CspyVx1UVAAASp85lAABC9mAAAk428A==
References: <4A24B17A.5000408@ericsson.com> <C64A98E2.3E3D%hsinnrei@adobe.com>
From: Slava Borilin <Borilin@spiritdsp.com>
To: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>, Jason Fischl <jason.fischl@skype.net>, Mary Barnes <mary.barnes@nortel.com>, "Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.64 on 192.168.125.15
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 08:26:35 -0700
Cc: Henry Sinnreich <hsinnrei@adobe.com>, dispatch@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband Audio Codec WG
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/dispatch>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 02 Jun 2009 15:08:16 -0000
Dear Gonzalo, by "to convince them may be to have IETF people with knowledge in this area volunteer to work on this and review the results." Gonzalo means find IETF voluntiers to review the idea of the WG?" you mean to find the IETF people who will vounteers to review the idea of such Wideband WG? regards, Slava Borilin ------ Forwarded Message From: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 21:58:34 -0700 To: Adobe Systems <hsinnrei@adobe.com> Cc: Roni Even <ron.even.tlv@gmail.com>, Jason Fischl <jason.fischl@skype.net>, Mary Barnes <mary.barnes@nortel.com>, "Peterson, Jon" <jon.peterson@neustar.biz>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com> Subject: Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband Audio Codec WG Hi Henry, given that some people on the list think that the IETF does not have that type of expertise, we need to have those list discussions so that the WG reaches consensus (one way or the other). It seems that when iLBC was developed, it was difficult to find IETF people to review it. That is probably why some people are hesitant about this. A way to convince them may be to have IETF people with knowledge in this area volunteer to work on this and review the results. Thanks, Gonzalo Henry Sinnreich wrote: > (list deleted) > > Gonzalo, > >>whether or not the IETF in general and RAI in particular have the > expertise to >>do this or at least review it when it is done. Comments? > > The folks from Skype driving this proposal have without any doubt the > best qualifications for building voice codecs, just as have many other > IETF AVT contributors, such as for the iLBC, SPEEX, IP-MR and other codecs. > > The pushback for the proposal for a WG for an Internet Audio Codec, is > quite amazing, especially the argument on available expertise. > (You certainly understand my arguments why the better expertise for an > _Internet_ codec is just in the IETF, and certainly not in the ITU-T, > ETSI, OMA, etc.). > > I don't plan therefore to participate any more in this discussion. > > Henry > > > On 5/30/09 1:17 AM, "Gonzalo Camarillo" <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com> > wrote: > > Hi, > > I think Roni touches upon an important point here. The first question we > need to answer (not only for this proposal; for any proposal) is whether > or not the IETF in general and RAI in particular have the expertise to > do this or at least review it when it is done. Comments? > > Cheers, > > Gonzalo > > Roni Even wrote: > > Hi, > > Like you mention other SDOs like ITU-T are doing just that. They > have the > > expertise to specify, and evaluate the result. These SDOs can receive > > requirements and select a proper codec based on the requirements. > > > > > > As for the other reasons: > > > > 1. Defining a codec in the IETF or even in MPEG / ITU-T does not > make it a > > mandatory part of a system solution, this is done by other > standard bodies > > like 3GPP, ETSI. > > > > 2. The IETF, similar to other standard bodies is not rubber stamping a > > specific solution, so you will most probably see in the final > result some > > technology that carry IPR. > > > > 3. If this group will be established, you will probably see here > the audio > > experts now working in ITU-T arguing the same issues since they > are the > > expertise you need and they work for the same companies that are > already > > members of IETF. > > > > I think that if you have a specific codec in mind you can make it > publicly > > available maybe with quality results and standardized in AVT a payload > > specification. > > > > BTW: The ITU is keeping a list of codecs (Not only ITU-T ones) in > a table > > that describes their features. > > > > Regards > > Roni Even > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: dispatch-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:dispatch-bounces@ietf.org] > On Behalf > > Of Jason Fischl > > Sent: Wednesday, May 27, 2009 2:18 AM > > To: dispatch@ietf.org > > Subject: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband Audio Codec WG > > > > All, > > > > I would like to request agenda time inside the DISPATCH meeting to > propose > > the formation of a new working group to define a Proposed Standard > wideband > > audio codec. > > > > The text of the proposal is below. Comments, questions, and > suggestions > > welcomed. > > > > Regards, > > Jason > > > > > > Internet Wideband Audio Codec (IWAC) > > Mailing Lists: TBD > > Chairs: TBD > > Area Directorate: Real Time Applications (RAI) > > > > Purpose: > > > > This new working group would be chartered with the purpose of > collecting > > expertise within the IETF in order to review the design of audio > codecs > > specifically for use with the Internet. Unlike other SDOs, these > codecs > > would be optimized for use on the Internet, and as much as > possible choose > > technology that does not require paying patent royalties. > > > > The Internet Low Bit Rate Codec (iLBC) work was done in AVT but > it was felt > > that subsequent work should not be done in the AVT working group. > This new > > working group will have as its primary purpose the standardization > of a > > multi-purpose audio codec that can be used in various situations > on the > > Internet. Some of the proposed Internet-specific requirements include: > > * scalable and adaptive bit rate; > > * various sampling rate profiles from narrow-band to super-wideband; > > * scalable complexity; > > * low latency; and > > * resilience to packet loss. > > > > There are a number of wide-band capable codecs defined by other > SDOs. For > > instance, G.722 is seeing adoption in Enterprise applications > since it is > > relatively simple and low-cost to deploy. However, it has a high, > fixed > > bitrate and is not appropriate for mobile applications where spectrum > > efficiency is important or in consumer applications where available > > bandwidth is fluctuating or limited. G.722.2 (AMR-wideband) has > been adopted > > by the 3GPP as a wideband standard for mobile applications. G.722.2 is > > relatively high cost due to patent royalties and is seeing minimal > > deployments outside of mobile handsets making it challenging to create > > wideband experiences on Internet-capable mobile devices when extending > > beyond the mobile network. In other cases, proprietary codecs are > being > > adopted which further create islands with no interoperability unless > > widespread transcoding is performed. Transcoding leads to higher > costs and > > lower quality. > > > > The goal of this working group is to define a single codec with > multiple > > profiles which can be made available on a wide variety of > Internet-capable > > devices including low-power, mobile devices as well as devices > capable of > > utilizing high quality, high bitrate audio. > > > > Proposed Deliverables: > > > > 1) Requirements for wideband, Internet audio codec(s). > > 2) Algorithm description for wideband, Internet audio codec(s) as > Proposed > > Standard. > > 3) Specification of payload format(s) for defined codecs as Proposed > > Standard > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dispatch mailing list > > dispatch@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > > > _______________________________________________ > > dispatch mailing list > > dispatch@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > > > > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > ------ End of Forwarded Message
- [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband Aud… Jason Fischl
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Eric Burger
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Roni Even
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Scott Lawrence
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Jason Fischl
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Roni Even
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Roni Even
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Roni Even
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Mary Barnes
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Eric Burger
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Cullen Jennings
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… eburger
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Roni Even
- Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband… Slava Borilin
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Jean-Marc Valin
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Roni Even
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… James M. Polk
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Spencer Dawkins
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Slava Borilin
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… stephen botzko
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… stephen botzko
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Henning Schulzrinne
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… stephen botzko
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… David Singer
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… David Singer
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Randell Jesup
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Slava Borilin
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Eric Burger
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Eric Burger
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Jean-Marc Valin
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Dan York
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Joel M. Halpern
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Henry Sinnreich
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Jason Fischl
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Dean Willis
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Christopher Montgomery
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [dispatch] [AVT] Proposal to form Internet Wi… Michael Ramalho (mramalho)