Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec

John Leslie <john@jlc.net> Mon, 15 December 2014 19:24 UTC

Return-Path: <john@jlc.net>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B36141A8763 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:24:13 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.21
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.21 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] 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 pBZ5r1eqY9KY for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:24:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailhost.jlc.net (mailhost.jlc.net [199.201.159.4]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C8D61A8760 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 11:24:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mailhost.jlc.net (Postfix, from userid 104) id 90B41C94BF; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:24:09 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:24:09 -0500
From: John Leslie <john@jlc.net>
To: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net>
Message-ID: <20141215192409.GN47023@verdi>
References: <548AFB1A.1040405@andyet.net> <548AFF76.1010003@nostrum.com> <CALiegfmH6hWp6nuArv8YyPcgq6SCd9x-dU0cxAaKJLrmb0hc_g@mail.gmail.com> <548B047F.9090704@nostrum.com> <56448CBD-FB31-4468-B449-497652FCAAEB@apple.com> <548B7EFF.5080105@andyet.net> <CALiegfkMUzQVOKk433d4TZtvenQWQwChYF2vc7HMED2s2wHZ5Q@mail.gmail.com> <B52D8E91-5D96-4960-8DDE-DD970014DE5D@ieca.com> <CALiegfnRvgDK4EnDBSn76YKktWLMjShsQRP6byCRqZC07WaVqw@mail.gmail.com> <548F0E28.8040503@andyet.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <548F0E28.8040503@andyet.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/17ZIvlv2if5yKEUM7wk6cXuNAeQ
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <rtcweb.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/>
List-Post: <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb>, <mailto:rtcweb-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 19:24:13 -0000

Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net> wrote:
> 
> 
> The IETF can *always* obsolete one RFC (e.g., one that says "dual-MTI 
> for H.264 and VP8") with another RFC (e.g., one that says "no more 
> dual-MTI for H.264 and VP8, we have much better options now"). That's a 
> core aspect of the Internet Standards Process.

   This is, of course, true...

   But we don't obsolete a MTI because "we have much better options":
we obsolete a MTI because "nobody's using it anymore".

   We are all trusting, I hope, that VP9, H.265, etc. will "just be
used in preference" as soon as two endpoints support them.

   I don't expect to revisit the MTI selection... (That is what we
want, right?)

--
John Leslie <john@jlc.net>