Re: [rtcweb] Resolution negotiation - a contribution

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Fri, 13 April 2012 07:45 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 A7F3C21F86C4 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 00:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 Fb4LqkC5Ny6r for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 00:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0648B21F8655 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 00:45:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1188939E0F3; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:45:52 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id AOuZwazHaJL5; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:45:51 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.11.107] (c213-89-143-9.bredband.comhem.se [213.89.143.9]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3EA0939E088; Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:45:51 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4F87D9B1.4000206@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 09:45:53 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.28) Gecko/20120313 Thunderbird/3.1.20
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Stephan Wenger <stewe@stewe.org>
References: <CBAC9299.85BFD%stewe@stewe.org>
In-Reply-To: <CBAC9299.85BFD%stewe@stewe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Resolution negotiation - a contribution
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: Fri, 13 Apr 2012 07:45:53 -0000

On 04/12/2012 11:13 PM, Stephan Wenger wrote:
>
> On 4.12.2012 12:08 , "Harald Alvestrand"<harald@alvestrand.no>  wrote:
>
>> On 04/12/2012 08:19 PM, Stephan Wenger wrote:
>>> Hi Harald,
>>> Thanks for this strawman.  I believe it should work, but I fail to see
>>> how
>>> a two dimensional negotiation requirement (negotiating max values for
>>> framerate and image size--which, in turn, also has two-dimensional
>>> properties) leads to better interop than a one dimensional negotiation
>>> (pixels per second processing requirement).
>> Stephan,
>>
>> I do not see this (or the requirement from the use-cases document) first
>> and foremost a decoder complexity negotiation; it is a negotiation of
>> how much data it is useful to send, given the recipient's intended use
>> of that data.
> Then such a negotiation should be executed in addition.  Decoder cycle
> requirement do matter in practical implementations.
Feel free to propose language that captures this requirement. As noted, 
my I-D fragment doesn't.