IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Consensus vs. Voting (was Re: Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio Codecs)

Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com> Thu, 17 January 2013 00:38 UTC

Return-Path: <martin.thomson@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 DB3EC11E80E7 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:38:56 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id q1ZnX24iBfWd for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:38:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wg0-f54.google.com (mail-wg0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1612811E80E5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:38:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id fg15so1247149wgb.21 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:38:55 -0800 (PST)
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=Kh/X1MAlV5wD/ClBqxU4tg2AAO2XsmNlhgJVVrF/8+E=; b=pO3dT2D9msvTTlGAaJSDhHZRJUAeG6sINt8EMEgx5vFus0Q6CpMqc9rakaBiJXLX5+ 1inBPg6k/Pftqts6sgww9DUeJlQ53OoOQsoSK3qM2r14R3QMo1wvrfe2lWEpeaQWMpYw a9IwLpKXVndh94BjN63ZRqC2fqfIL1ei5R5lxFmGzwI98+3FXTlgU0j4xkUu5PtcLfw3 mDduxp0L0bAf5EjvbSbtbWJZ37n067sa6TjyTcKJqSgXx8J3lF+ZT/DC2ZRqt52XYJRp WIBOT10CqIAN3I7HE4riqD8og/FTaG40PLD0Usn+ljeoPE9pSagj+fN2EQ9fQnV7YG5F TIAA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.108.101 with SMTP id hj5mr5407531wjb.6.1358383135166; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:38:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.180.164.174 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:38:54 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE20D7468A700@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <50D2CC6A.4090500@ericsson.com> <6515_1357907583_50F0067F_6515_1738_1_2842AD9A45C83B44B57635FD4831E60A0747CC@PEXCVZYM14.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <BLU0-SMTP880A602A311CE05C9DC39FD0290@phx.gbl> <A26C56D5-C501-4823-8099-62AF7910B8A4@ntt-at.com> <580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D16813E56EC@HE111648.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <50F41D97.1030508@nostrum.com> <CAD5OKxtsWMfAV=K4sM+zLXoyVCgihwujH2gG9ziA5GuEtsU0sQ@mail.gmail.com> <50F43ACA.80206@nostrum.com> <CAD5OKxug2qB+Xi_cp87Lt7BiPwJ1Eq1rNuioj+zDZFf=RRckPw@mail.gmail.com> <50F44AF0.4060304@nostrum.com> <CAD5OKxs7Ueto0k-5TWnQtgb+Pocp-SSu3ctr3qFs5qrcPgMtkQ@mail.gmail.com> <50F4619F.7040208@nostrum.com> <CAD5OKxu3_JJ3zS8hCeG-nHM72t=0j--ihUR8E5NvL9--wmmnEA@mail.gmail.com> <7CBFD4609D19C043A4AC4FD8381C6E2602386636@DEMUEXC014.nsn-intra.net> <50F5A74C.3030203@nostrum.com> <CABkgnnXRcFHj4gi6WEDDqU+S-adnjd91wQW4bL2S6pO8YtzE3w@mail.gmail.com> <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE20D7468A700@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 16:38:54 -0800
Message-ID: <CABkgnnVM7N3J7okDHvH0YG-+q+aaR5hwcjCFyaciUgnLucffUw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Consensus vs. Voting (was Re: Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio Codecs)
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: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 00:38:57 -0000

On 16 January 2013 16:27, DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
<keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
> there was also the point, which I agree with, that if you have a licensed version of any codec on your device, ideally you want your browser to support that codec

I think that misses the point of my question.  I asked about what
specifically do you consider to be the cost of this particular
failure?  However much we might want these things to not happen, I
want to know what the consequences are.

As Matthew observes, even MUST might be insufficient to convince an
implementation to support a codec because the most effective (and
perhaps only) way to convince someone to implement something is to
show that it increases ROI.

So, I want to know the cost that you incur if this is not SHOULD.
Ideally, what fails to interoperate in this scenario?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email