IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb

Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu> Mon, 02 December 2013 22:05 UTC

Return-Path: <hartmans@mit.edu>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C7781ADF84 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:05:00 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.235
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.235 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665] autolearn=no
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 2_xnbB9k_8xn for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:04:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.painless-security.com (mail.painless-security.com [23.30.188.241]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5879F1ADF91 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:04:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68027205C4; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 17:04:05 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mail.painless-security.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.suchdamage.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 65HNxhUPWvEr; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 17:04:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: from carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (c-50-136-31-107.hsd1.ma.comcast.net [50.136.31.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "laptop", Issuer "laptop" (not verified)) by mail.painless-security.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 17:04:04 -0500 (EST)
Received: by carter-zimmerman.suchdamage.org (Postfix, from userid 8042) id 08B4E8375A; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 17:04:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
Subject: Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb
References: <52970A36.5010503@ericsson.com> <529719D7.9020109@cisco.com> <CAMm+LwgF-NL=LxaAjkVPVVO6a1oevLvvNqYxn6ug5w-zxdez3Q@mail.gmail.com> <D9F35A16-58D8-4F7F-A640-3E9B0A341BD8@iii.ca> <CA355BB7-8287-41EB-A59F-2955EE5D4C07@tzi.org> <5299FF7D.90701@dcrocker.net> <D28087EC-EDDC-4D53-BC9C-39D78CA7CF7A@tzi.org>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 17:04:56 -0500
In-Reply-To: <D28087EC-EDDC-4D53-BC9C-39D78CA7CF7A@tzi.org> (Carsten Bormann's message of "Mon, 2 Dec 2013 18:17:29 +0100")
Message-ID: <tsl38mac3jr.fsf@mit.edu>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.4 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: IETF Discussion <ietf@ietf.org>, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>, rtcweb-chairs@tools.ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 22:05:00 -0000

>>>>> "Carsten" == Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> writes:

    Carsten> On 30 Nov 2013, at 16:08, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:
    >> On 11/28/2013 7:27 PM, Carsten Bormann wrote:
    >>> In a similar vein, can anyone point out what we get if the IETF
    >>> were to agree on a single MTI video codec for WebRTC?  What is
    >>> the upside to making this herculean effort?
    >> 
    >> 
    >> basic interoperability, without prior agreement.

    Carsten> If making something MTI in a spec guaranteed that
    Carsten> interoperability, I wouldn’t have asked.

>From Cullen's message it sounds like a number of people believe that the
MTI  mechanism in the spec will influence what some implementations do.

For me that has real value and seems like a reason to spend significant
effort trying to come to a decision.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email