Re: [rtcweb] Microsoft tells W3C and IETF what we are doing no signs of offering real world interoperability

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <> Mon, 06 August 2012 20:00 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F298E21F84D3 for <>; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 13:00:41 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.467
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.467 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.132, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id VGpBHfsxaPqx for <>; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 13:00:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 482EA21F8493 for <>; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 13:00:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=1063; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1344283239; x=1345492839; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=SJLA4AyPmRXafBHjC1POho2ST6O2vLNHFMebO9ondDg=; b=S3pEdBdUwHCR1NsoirBw4GwpYMzKCiHxqDqixGS2b5dBjAz5yBO1xflD TTzi0QDON/65lcdMOT9WwudeVRdbJh9uxVxybyxhsxue9haq7uL9WDr8X Qtk2gMI4iQNQC5VAojOrNsvYJ2bJlasvRHoBSZb/+b3UZlFFEll+On8kc A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Aj4FAOshIFCtJXG8/2dsb2JhbABFtW6DWoEHgiABAQEDARIBZgULAgEIOwsyJQIEDieHZQYLmnegH4tKhiRgA5VJgRSNEoFmgl8
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.77,720,1336348800"; d="scan'208";a="108708839"
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP; 06 Aug 2012 20:00:38 +0000
Received: from ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q76K0ccn025004 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Mon, 6 Aug 2012 20:00:38 GMT
Received: from ([]) by ([]) with mapi id 14.02.0298.004; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 15:00:38 -0500
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <>
To: Rohit Puri <>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Microsoft tells W3C and IETF what we are doing no signs of offering real world interoperability
Thread-Index: AQHNdAmGDrNTZRUPr0+8joeDXihPyJdNiAmA
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 20:00:37 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
x-tm-as-product-ver: SMEX-
x-tm-as-result: No--18.677400-8.000000-31
x-tm-as-user-approved-sender: No
x-tm-as-user-blocked-sender: No
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-ID: <>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "" <>, "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Microsoft tells W3C and IETF what we are doing no signs of offering real world interoperability
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 20:00:42 -0000

On Aug 6, 2012, at 1:27 PM, Rohit Puri wrote:

> Based on our experiences at TenHands Inc. where we are trying to build a RT video-centric collaboration service, the goal cited in MSFT proposal (, namely:
> "Flexibility in its support of popular media formats and codecs as well as openness to future innovation—A successful standard cannot be tied to individual codecs, data formats or scenarios. They may soon be supplanted by newer versions, which would make such a tightly coupled standard obsolete just as quickly. The right approach is instead to to support multiple media formats and to bring the bulk of the logic to the application layer, enabling developers to innovate. "
> sounds like a great idea. 

and every proposal from any company or individual that I can recall being sent to theses WGs has had exactly that property. So it is sort of disappointing to see Microsoft present it as if their proposal was somehow different in this regards.