IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Agenda time request for draft-marjou-rtcweb-audio-codecs-for-interop-01

Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com> Wed, 13 March 2013 19:55 UTC

Return-Path: <jmvalin@mozilla.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 79D8411E809C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:55:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HOST_MISMATCH_COM=0.311, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 5X5pNHIY9MKY for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.mozilla.org (mx1.corp.phx1.mozilla.com [63.245.216.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D906811E80ED for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [130.129.33.249] (dhcp-21f9.meeting.ietf.org [130.129.33.249]) (Authenticated sender: jvalin@mozilla.com) by mx1.mail.corp.phx1.mozilla.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C6C4F210E; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 12:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <5140D995.5050702@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:55:01 -0400
From: Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130215 Thunderbird/17.0.3
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: stephane.proust@orange.com
References: <E8F5F2C7B2623641BD9ABF0B622D726D0F68869E@xmb-rcd-x11.cisco.com> <CA+9kkMA7x18x3rD9PoPx-rA+4uz7ome3LjQ7sOWHDptz0zJX6g@mail.gmail.com> <CAErhfrx24SR5zwH3oHQi_PhFkfQjCmbMuatwEw2kjJ184MiUpw@mail.gmail.com> <5140D259.6010208@mozilla.com> <31611_1363203420_5140D55C_31611_11752_1_cb7bfd1e-a4ca-40ba-bbbc-cb23fb3f3edb@PEXCVZYH02.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
In-Reply-To: <31611_1363203420_5140D55C_31611_11752_1_cb7bfd1e-a4ca-40ba-bbbc-cb23fb3f3edb@PEXCVZYH02.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, MARJOU Xavier OLNC/OLN <xavier.marjou@orange.com>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Agenda time request for draft-marjou-rtcweb-audio-codecs-for-interop-01
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: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 19:55:03 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 03/13/2013 03:36 PM, stephane.proust@orange.com wrote:
> Our understanding is that the reason of the "no consensus" on 
> additional recommended codecs was the additional costs for
> browsers. The proposal is then to make these "MUST" fully
> conditional to the case of no (or very reduced) additional costs,
> when the codecs are already available on the device and when no
> additional license fee is required

I think this understanding is wrong, or else there would have been
consensus on recommending G.722. People (including myself) objected on
the basis that SHOULD/RECOMMENDED is too strong for an optional codec.

> We could even live with lower level of "requirements" with 
> respectively May and Should (instead of Should and shall) but we 
> think that this proposal is a way to take into account both
> browser manufacturers concerns on browsers costs and telcos
> concerns on transcoding costs and some other companies share this
> view.

It should all be MAY unless the WG agrees on making any of these
codecs a SHOULD -- which has not happened yet AFAIK.

Cheers,

	Jean-Marc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRQNmVAAoJEJ6/8sItn9q9BJoIAIxTzEW27t64Sxi+uyKKxCc+
IKX5A7F5SCwpcjhaWWybWa1TOYunxOBo24XIXsWyYqambA1nXnlgCcSqCbj7hrbq
onIy+vnzpgBdnFL53DijogWTBoHwIWLZFjxL9oJXrWPoMdlhn3B3PoZcCAWUbd0x
EHnmbtsqwQRzPnB1bJa/mdtWGLHbnz6Zv9pFolipB60h6Ne3PSydk8jEqy7zhugC
XLKzmPND3GCyQL91YNdWjWHFqrpUeYlB0qS27m1GyddH3dp2EI5b7mRmS8/Yi98h
zMJvRlfpr3TVa0xtExzVYZpI44qr9+7QbRoCUnIEiHg45nBKJ+1VlDegZAwvNMs=
=6Ty9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

v2.46.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status