Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue

David Singer <singer@apple.com> Mon, 28 October 2013 09:20 UTC

Return-Path: <singer@apple.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 7C3B911E824C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 02:20:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 s57smGbq2KWR for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 02:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-out.apple.com (bramley.apple.com [17.151.62.49]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7721811E8239 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 02:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: text/plain; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
Received: from relay4.apple.com ([17.128.113.87]) by mail-out.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-23.01 (7.0.4.23.0) 64bit (built Aug 10 2011)) with ESMTP id <0MVD00G1PGKFST00@mail-out.apple.com> for rtcweb@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 02:19:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: 11807157-b7ff46d000001540-69-526e2c3878a1
Received: from spicerack.apple.com (spicerack.apple.com [17.128.115.40]) (using TLS with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by relay4.apple.com (Apple SCV relay) with SMTP id 03.A7.05440.83C2E625; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 02:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [17.153.57.41] (unknown [17.153.57.41]) by spicerack.apple.com (Oracle Communications Messaging Server 7u4-24.01 (7.0.4.24.0) 64bit (built Nov 17 2011)) with ESMTPSA id <0MVD00BADGL2A620@spicerack.apple.com> for rtcweb@ietf.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2013 02:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Sun-Java-System-SMTP-Warning: Lines longer than SMTP allows found and truncated.
From: David Singer <singer@apple.com>
In-reply-to: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB123CE3208@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:19:49 +0100
Message-id: <0DB4F63F-F111-41E3-B961-0B73B058867D@apple.com>
References: <52681A96.2020904@alvestrand.no> <526826AF.5030308@librevideo.org> <52690090.2050609@alvestrand.no> <BBE9739C2C302046BD34B42713A1E2A22DFCD683@ESESSMB105.ericsson.se> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A4843D45DC08@TK5EX14MBXC266.redmond.corp.microsoft.com> <5269764C.4030801@librevideo.org> <52698758.5040404@bbs.darktech.org> <CAD6AjGSb5syh0HO+89fH8cGZ0zqM6gYLPj3aeTRQLN0u8W4cSg@mail.gmail.com> <5269F098.2020904@alvestrand.no> <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7620A0F272E@008-AM1MPN1-043.mgdnok.nokia.com> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B0BF358@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <CAGgHUiRtXUAJTotAFX7YwQ6cS_OD-MpAb+898c6OYxm7D5xXKw@mail.gmail.com> <FCBEDCB500188C488DA30C874B94F80E1C01158C@xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com> <CAOJ7v-1iV4_SvToRYYtDZszxkSDF0qmrS4YN8w7OFQ3p29CaDw@mail.gmail.com> <526AE703.8000409@bbs.darktech.org> <CA+9kkMC=RrmAEyd0uWjpPhvCGuUnj5ATmuZrA7FnAxXhqMJXrg@mail.gmail.com> <526C15CD.5020601@bbs.darktech.org> <526C3FE4.2040301@alvestrand.no> <526C4686.2080702@bbs.darktech>
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFlrKLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUi2FCsoWuhkxdksPGKlcXaf+3sDoweS5b8 ZApgjOKySUnNySxLLdK3S+DKuPx1DWvBcaGKYy/2sTUwfuTrYuTkkBAwkVjdtJYRwhaTuHBv PRuILSQwmUni++TALkYuIHshk8SJL3OZQRLCAgESnxr3sYDYzAJaEut3HmcCsXkF9CR27t3G ClFjLNHz5DPYIDYBVYkHc46BLeAU8JU4PeUeWD0LUHzSxodQc7Qlnry7ANTLATTHRuLkUROI vS0cEk1L1oDNFBFQl7j88AI7xKGyEqfPPWeZwCgwC8kZs5CcMQvJ2AWMzKsYBYpScxIrTfQS CwpyUvWS83M3MYIDrzB8B+O/ZVaHGAU4GJV4eCNW5wYJsSaWFVfmHmKU4GBWEuE1Uc0LEuJN SaysSi3Kjy8qzUktPsQozcGiJM67sDs7SEggPbEkNTs1tSC1CCbLxMEp1cCYdWrBwk7xyeUs nO/cb75MbfsXf4LFY7XGFvauO5x8+4qVsids+WvBUjlTc0cAp9gC5inK7cdOv30uss91h8bO tTLTppge+7n5/4rwB4rnkzOf/zL/5DNNpd3L2jVn8wypywvnfFPhe5fVHc3zdIm+uKmchcX6 Saom97/trdt08vHh6asf3VLgVGIpzkg01GIuKk4EAJpdDvI4AgAA
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] VP8 vs H.264 - the core issue
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: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:20:00 -0000

On Oct 27, 2013, at 19:26 , Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com> wrote:

> 
> On Oct 26, 2013, at 4:47 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 26/10/2013 6:19 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
>>> I actually think Martin Thomson and Travis Leithead have been giving great input and been positive contributors. Not to belittle the contributions of others, but those two especially have made many positive contributions.
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>    An open process has to feel genuine, not just in words, but also in actions.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I think we may have some differing perspectives.
>> 
>> I guess what I'm saying is... if all is well, then what's going on with Microsoft and Apple? What's their official position regarding MTI? Will it impact their intent to bundle WebRTC in their browsers? If we truly have an open process and representatives from Microsoft and Apple sitting on the WG then I would expect to get official answers to these questions.
>> 
>> I've seen multiple representatives from Microsoft, but not a single person from Apple. Is anyone representing them in an official capacity?
> 
> Apple people have been involved (in fact are co-authors of some of the drafts on the VP8 vs H264 topic) and Microsoft clearly been very involved with the WG as well.  Kaufman has been clear his employer has a policy of not pre announcing products and I believe the same is true of Apple. This is often true of standards work in any WG so it limits how much people can exactly say about their employers until product is announced - that's pretty normal at IETF. 

We would be delighted for the community to establish a royalty free codec, in particular for web applications. To that goal, among other efforts, and together with several other companies, we proposed to MPEG last year H.264 Constrained Baseline as a basis for a new royalty free standard. This project, named by MPEG Web Video Coding, is now at a DIS (Draft International Standard) stage, and we are collecting IPR disclosures.
We are also co-authors on the H.264 proposal for MTI to WebRTC.

As others have noted, we are, alas, formally constrained not to discuss what we might or might not do in future (sorry).

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.