Re: [dispatch] Proposal to form Internet Wideband Audio Codec WG

[Jason Fischl <[e-mail]>]

On 5/28/09 7:18 AM, "Eric Burger" <[e-mail]> wrote:

> Smells to me either a binary situation:
> 
> Best Case: A bunch of people know exactly what they want and they just
> need to document it. Do it in AVT.
>
I think it is closer to this case. The issue with doing this in AVT is that
the expertise required to review an audio codec may be quite different from
what is available in AVT. If we do decide to do the work in AVT, we'll need
to update the charter as it explicitly forbids codec work.

>From AVT charter: 
>>> - to develop payload formats for new media codecs, and to document
>>> best-current practices in payload format design. The group
>>> continues to be precluded from work on codecs themselves because of
>>> overlap with the other standards bodies, and because the IETF does not
>>> have the ability to effectively review new codecs. An exception was
>>> made for the freeware iLBC codec on a highly experimental basis, but
>>> acceptance of new codec work is unexpected and subject to rechartering.

 
> Worst Case: We know what we need in terms of requirements, but we are
> not sure how to get there. Smells like a math problem. Do it in the
> IRTF.
>