Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb
Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Thu, 28 November 2013 22:53 UTC
Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
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 0FF791ADF64 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:53:16 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.998 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, GB_I_LETTER=-2, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, LOTS_OF_MONEY=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 zUZOKgUtU6Aj for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:53:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-lb0-x229.google.com (mail-lb0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::229]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF1CB1ADF76 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:53:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-lb0-f169.google.com with SMTP id y6so6531049lbh.14 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:53:12 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=YsLr0BMA2nvxKBu8P/cOSIqf6GtwIjwQDD9O3DVc8Kg=; b=lr8ZMe33tzI5W/vd2Epez5S3ZN8l1/S9nQ5YqhaE+8JYW4WRM1rM4SmYQAk/SMnNmH 8TbOzjf99UE1ky0uFk9xtnyXZSs03BkVc1XxSW+E41/6Vm/tERMl4H11G2yUJ46lxiH+ tO55PvmKAVCa+oUC0KIo3MMxf31kVDnlfRUT5FmBH7syTtnMxUIvY5H+5EwiyV3SU9py 1JjqeVnC/7EXRIEiJM2YvWkkJk/M7Bs9zg7w2mzDUtFR6is0EDYT09UtS78KA73yo6PR OFnzjdknn6MkGe+TQzD5TMaSY+K9MVIwdxPa0BoQLln6LZMX7yFJxZ1rRdeKj/RV7n4l p8CA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.152.121.105 with SMTP id lj9mr1512474lab.6.1385679192099; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:53:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.112.37.172 with HTTP; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 14:53:12 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAKHUCzwZm1E5uhwRhX2LJYdAVFWH0gzX0vx70bHje7SvDK22uA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <52970A36.5010503@ericsson.com> <529719D7.9020109@cisco.com> <CAKHUCzxjwMXzy6=9WdRPRRCunKsLm9JFuo6JavMtEC7Tbov8TQ@mail.gmail.com> <529755F6.4050404@dcrocker.net> <CAKHUCzwZm1E5uhwRhX2LJYdAVFWH0gzX0vx70bHje7SvDK22uA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 17:53:12 -0500
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwgnPYXsA1GjW9x=x_7e4=yXb8cmVDXOzPX2DaTAcyQDeg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0122771604932804ec4494c1"
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: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 22:53:16 -0000
On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:04 AM, Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 2:40 PM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote: > >> BTW, as distasteful as it might be, is there a reason that making /both/ >> MTI would not work? >> > > Speaking as a third party to this, so I may have misinterpreted, then yes. > My (possibly simplistic and/or plain wrong) summary follows: > > The problem appears to be largely driven by actual IPR issues surrounding > H.264, though it has strong hardware support particularly within the > incumbent VOIP market players. > > My impression is that VP8 is largely (though not entirely) thought to be > free from IPR headaches, but lacks the hardware support that is baked into > the market. [I have seen exchanges suggesting that other people suspect VP8 > of having IPR issues, but nobody I've seen in the posts I've reviewed has > claimed that position for themselves, so it's not clear to me how IPR-free > it's really perceived] > The issues for vendors are litigation risk and cost. If you are a commercial vendor with an existing H.264 license there is no cost and no litigation risk for using that codec but the licenses you have acquired are almost certainly specific to H.264. So using any other CODEC is likely to create a substantial liability risk. If you are an open source provider without a H.264 license the situation is very different. This is not going to be settled by a vote. I am not speaking for any of the parties but if I did have a dog in this fight I would have my corporate counsel write a letter to the WG stating that we are not going to be bound on the WG decision in this case. We are talking about a decision that could result in a hundred million dollar lawsuit. The issue is not who is going to write code but who is likely to get hit with a suit. -- Website: http://hallambaker.com/
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Jari Arkko
- Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Eliot Lear
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Cridland
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Eric Burger
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Cridland
- A few thoughts on processes WAS (Re: Alternative … Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Eric Burger
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Eliot Lear
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Cridland
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Crocker
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Eric Rescorla
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Cridland
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Ted Lemon
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Sam Hartman
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Eric Rescorla
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Crocker
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Cullen Jennings
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Cridland
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Ted Lemon
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Melinda Shore
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Tim Bray
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Yoav Nir
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Michael Richardson
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Ted Lemon
- RE: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Bernard Aboba
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Carsten Bormann
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Ted Lemon
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Roberto Peon
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Cridland
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Stephan Wenger
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Roger Jørgensen
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Harald Alvestrand
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Crocker
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Joel M. Halpern
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Melinda Shore
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Eric Burger
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Ofer Inbar
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb cb.list6
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Ted Hardie
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Melinda Shore
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Scott O. Bradner
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Eric Burger
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Paul Hoffman
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Ted Hardie
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Avri Doria
- RE: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Mary Barnes
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Ron
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb cb.list6
- Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decision p… Eric Burger
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… cb.list6
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… Mary Barnes
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Carsten Bormann
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Dave Crocker
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Pete Resnick
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Jari Arkko
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Dave Crocker
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… Eric Burger
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Sam Hartman
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Sam Hartman
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Bjoern Hoehrmann
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Martin Thomson
- Re: Alternative decision process in RTCWeb Ofer Inbar
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Ted Lemon
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Eric Burger
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Jim Gettys
- 0, 1, or many standards and their impact (or not) Eliot Lear
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Hector Santos
- Re: 0, 1, or many standards and their impact (or … Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… Peter Saint-Andre
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Jari Arkko
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Eric Burger
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… Richard Barnes
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: [rtcweb] Alternative decision process in RTCW… David Singer
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
- Re: A few thoughts on processes WAS (Re: Alternat… Eliot Lear
- Re: A few thoughts on processes WAS (Re: Alternat… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: A few thoughts on processes WAS (Re: Alternat… Dave Crocker
- Re: A few thoughts on processes WAS (Re: Alternat… Gonzalo Camarillo
- Re: A few thoughts on processes WAS (Re: Alternat… Spencer Dawkins at IETF
- Re: Daughter of CODEC (was Re: Alternative decisi… Timothy B. Terriberry