IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Interoperability between browsers (MTI Video)

Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> Sat, 16 March 2013 21:17 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 784DA21F883C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 14:17:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.203
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.203 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_QP_LONG_LINE=1.396, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6HcqlO2RBOzp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 14:17:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc3-s18.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc3-s18.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.93]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F382321F8838 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 14:17:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU402-EAS28 ([65.55.116.74]) by blu0-omc3-s18.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sat, 16 Mar 2013 14:17:07 -0700
X-EIP: [7LUi99uKz9U4ypodGUlYXzrwMcVOrqID]
X-Originating-Email: [bernard_aboba@hotmail.com]
Message-ID: <BLU402-EAS287A23CE95CE9F7C2F324193EE0@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
References: <CAGgHUiQPNSOEtffncjXMozxPM70hL9N++sM=RkC6qVFGSFNREA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <CAGgHUiQPNSOEtffncjXMozxPM70hL9N++sM=RkC6qVFGSFNREA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 17:17:08 -0400
To: Leon Geyser <lgeyser@gmail.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 16 Mar 2013 21:17:07.0270 (UTC) FILETIME=[9D26FE60:01CE228B]
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Interoperability between browsers (MTI Video)
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 21:17:07 -0000

On Mar 16, 2013, at 15:18, "Leon Geyser" <lgeyser@gmail.com> wrote:

> In my opinion there really is a need for a MTI video codec for interoperability between browsers.
> 
> Here are some scenarios on MTI decisions:
> 
> -- Decide on no MTI codec:
> This would split the browers in two sides.

[BA] No. It just removes the stick that each side can use to beat the other side.  The need for interoperability still remains, and most likely will either be addressed by the marketplace choosing one over the other decisively, or if deployment is split, by support for (limited) codec extensibility.

v2.14.0 | Report a Bug | By Email