[rtcweb] compressed codec-free webrtc?

Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> Tue, 29 October 2013 18:33 UTC

Return-Path: <dave.taht@gmail.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 22C6021F9F45; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:33:16 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.267
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.267 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.333, BAYES_00=-2.599, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 00C-rx1PhhTD; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:33:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wg0-x230.google.com (mail-wg0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::230]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D8B411E8185; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:33:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wg0-f48.google.com with SMTP id b13so263430wgh.27 for <multiple recipients>; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=0OykHK2Y/4qJTYzx0R9umLQO+V0KuDTm82t6VZ2tmOA=; b=hJriR93e8N2wgZ8uzfShEOSiGU5hkH7OrEq3Dpf+CUrHT9Uz3DF/2Zo7agjSj+ULyT OekOi+K9BxVtzyrcprjVRytSg5G/lFixsUsqZw8dRZxhTxfkHL6qZGl2YI0u2nCYEFcw QHJRZGwgHzhpm253rvqghM/NZPHOaQaDKt5Y73aIXq130yVxBwBJb+xSWdjDMJ+azVOu MGL/IEMxRL8bE462z9W/T1kllKokNNUlQ7T/vxqWh89GhMf4stUtrNxpAl/rOWljBKqS +pphj9BSIvRZ4l/N7s5QNYOSSMMxDH6tfYKktWEmmQzlFxvybmSQnONf9X6l6f/F8W14 j1rQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.184.14 with SMTP id eq14mr676140wic.56.1383071587668; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.217.67.202 with HTTP; Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 11:33:07 -0700
Message-ID: <CAA93jw72QwmwQ1+wqG9soa8joiuLGRiaKuYnTvkHqkQ20FQ+gg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: "rmcat@ietf.org" <rmcat@ietf.org>, rtcweb@ietf.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: [rtcweb] compressed codec-free webrtc?
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: Tue, 29 Oct 2013 18:33:16 -0000

In having my eyes glaze over at the codec debate I found myself
wondering to what extent anyone was pursuing truly low latency video
and audio, along the lines of what the lola project has been doing for
collaborative concerts.

See:

http://www.conts.it/artistica/lola-project

They ship raw audio and raw video, they actually use cameras where
they can get at scanlines and ship that (saving 16ms)

So I'm ignorant of what webrtc can do is there a codec selection (yuv?
48 bit audio? for the rawest video and audio possible?) All the extra
encoding steps we take today induce extra latency, and available
bandwidth continues to increase... and from a cc perspective if you
drop some bits from a scanline that's not a problem, but from audio
it's a huge deal....


-- 
Dave Täht

Fixing bufferbloat with cerowrt: http://www.teklibre.com/cerowrt/subscribe.html