Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec discussion in Thursday agenda slot

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Tue, 12 March 2013 20:33 UTC

Return-Path: <ted.ietf@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 8F2A711E8163 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.587
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.587 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.013, 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 PK9Kc5p7IYSh for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:33:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x231.google.com (mail-ie0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::231]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09BE821F8C8C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:33:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f177.google.com with SMTP id 16so405171iea.22 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:33:04 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=tYlQLLtT+jfSLg3rLj0MLcAVFWYwit6txKHb3oGgFDQ=; b=VdUafLIPjEi2PJ4W/8omnTIQZfrXq7TXokOkzBxcukMMrW22TnI8lagq7EbtJCpRoY c65MMawxou4aNlf5zurW4egFJQ/vTgS5fLcXuqJG35eEwn2Bqf2WjYUYrysEZ0VUC5NF 2c+TXLgCEfI55T7vq1d9xG77SBrfGKz+iSHoFtLdcmrxelnYQeBHIr/WIWI/GyTYKk7O q+Moeou5BBAKoPKIOyQnvndkNpmX5TucJIh+btDp8RXkNkp8ejUGfIznxZLC7uyxWfA2 S23yQZW2k9ywOogHPRW5c6JXRIcPNiMQkj+KXievBQOm02nAGsEBveY/2FyW/ok2/23X 73eg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.43.88.134 with SMTP id ba6mr10685150icc.18.1363120384692; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:33:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.43.135.202 with HTTP; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 13:33:04 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <513F8D2D.2070502@nostrum.com>
References: <513F68C0.4010106@ericsson.com> <DD34B1B0-2C18-4081-81CC-584192CC726C@apple.com> <CA+9kkMChmdyzeRgfNPK4oDhZHhj0BDXptPnrx-c+RRmEP=K=+g@mail.gmail.com> <92D0D52F3A63344CA478CF12DB0648AA2653BC5E@XMB106BCNC.rim.net> <CA+9kkMArtaw1=1H3cHcVaFhaFCCfjy7Tzwc1EDJ2vZc6UOhL=g@mail.gmail.com> <1BF51E01-AE8A-4DCF-82B9-7C8AE95A3C6E@apple.com> <CA+9kkMD94qFxjBK45sMj3cm+23hnGa50MUKd9YomZ5mt9R+6Nw@mail.gmail.com> <513F8D2D.2070502@nostrum.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 16:33:04 -0400
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMA8wjx_a2Gz6EpF=OXs7cmrzTVB0poAoQ=w00cagiWzKw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
To: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: Stuart Cheshire <cheshire@apple.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec discussion in Thursday agenda slot
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, 12 Mar 2013 20:33:13 -0000

Thanks, Robert, for this clarification.

Ted

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> wrote:
> On 3/12/13 3:39 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 3:33 PM, David Singer <singer@apple.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> * The decision rests on (at least) late-breaking news, and
>>> unavailable information, and I am opposed to any move to get a >formal
>>> decision for a mandatory video codec at the meeting.
>>>
>>>
>> Hi David, Gaelle,
>>
>> I am glad that we all agree that the technical discussion is needed
>> and can go forward.
>>
>> On the IPR issue, my understanding is that Robert will call for a
>> sense of the room on who believes that they have enough data now to
>> make decision and, if not, what exactly is needed.
>
> I do not believe we can call for consensus on this question at this meeting.
>
> We _do_ need to have the technical discussions.
>
> I am planning to take the sense of the room using the questions that have
> already been published. These are not going to make a decision on their
> own, but may help with reading consensus when we do make that call.
>
> I do expect the working group to have this consensus call soon. As the
> chairs
> have mentioned earlier in the thread, we hope to make this call on the list
> in
> the next few weeks, ->well before the IETF87 meeting in Berlin<-. We
> understand
> there needs to be some lead time.
>
> RjS
>
>
>>   That will occur
>> *before* any discussion on which will be chosen.  I am confident he is
>> aware of the discussion on the list to date from those who are already
>> indicating their preferences to wait for more information, but I have
>> cc'ed him explicitly on this message so he can confirm.
>>
>> As noted before, none of the chairs will be making the calls related
>> to the codec question.
>>
>> regards,
>>
>> Ted Hardie
>
>