Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Thu, 16 August 2012 17:35 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.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 DBCB721F845F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.868
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.868 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.108, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 WXzMgGcWt-6j for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-qc0-f172.google.com (mail-qc0-f172.google.com [209.85.216.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 763C321F845D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qcac10 with SMTP id c10so2616692qca.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=zwDTyFA5mDlZkLhpiFl2T6wQg2eIPI/vFq8uSSHQH+o=; b=K3Vkd5WpDlMUKoKapFskP+BV2CFfYYu7+SS7QqVOT7qjC37aOHo63MSl/W2AcvCdbv WKJcYcQ3+GafT6LiRfirpTEuqMQlZZarpnztVd1CYYq5VSXrG6VIsqf5DQHfZVpfBQkm 6X8g3hOIqeQDv1A3eTWU6Kh1vcueksp7CBk9/DGK0N3du23qSjM89JfRg79InYYCr+nP 7XFHEt/5mtg/XqbUwg1yCEIT/5o7vQKAVW2YGubr47JechKgzTl993yMYT1ZDCil2ydc MqeXtCXuns1e5RDgIRqfBBSC+VX5cHiOfCJupjfonizDsgXPmVH3bN2WjdCm2iYBkNIB AWdw==
Received: by 10.229.106.130 with SMTP id x2mr1246402qco.121.1345138502934; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-vb0-f44.google.com (mail-vb0-f44.google.com [209.85.212.44]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gp4sm7388280qab.3.2012.08.16.10.35.02 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by vbbez10 with SMTP id ez10so3030375vbb.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.59.0.41 with SMTP id av9mr972328ved.32.1345138501819; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.58.255.66 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 10:35:01 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <9E2843EA-EBB9-40B3-898C-6B5216FAE7A5@cisco.com>
References: <9E2843EA-EBB9-40B3-898C-6B5216FAE7A5@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 13:35:01 -0400
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxtxqxo6scKc1xCUoJAgTV_X87f=PwKz-VuqhrxHYjSXGA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bdc992c931c6e04c76576cf
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmtqjo0J1swBQTA2mBYqh8DGeTYftT70i3do1Ks97T+lRVgeHDfvNzbHeY5k6DYAB9s0zmi
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on 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, 16 Aug 2012 17:35:15 -0000

As I have mentioned before I would like to see G.722 as a mandatory to
implement codec in addition to G.711 and OPUS. G.722 is license free and is
widely supported. It operates at the same bandwidths as G.711 with
virtually the same CPU requirements, but offers HD audio
quality superior to G.711.

One question I wanted to ask about G.711, do we require any of the
appendixes to be implemented, ie would PLC and DTX be required? I think
that PLC should be at least recommended, since it will significantly
improve resulting communication experience in most of the real deployment
scenarios.
_____________
Roman Shpount


On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
<fluffy@cisco.com>wrote;wrote:

>
> At the last meeting we took a hum on selecting Opus and G.711 as the
> mediatory to implement audio codecs. If there is any new opinions please
> send them to the list by August 30th, after which the chairs will make a
> determination of consensus.
>
> Thanks,
> Cullen
>
> Please note that the following IPR disclosure have been made on these
> codecs. They can be found at
>
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/
>
>
> 2010-11-07
> • ID # 1445
> "Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-00 and draft-ietf-codec-description-00 (1)"
> 2010-11-07
> • ID # 1446
> "Xiph.Org Foundation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-00"
> 2010-11-12
> • ID # 1447
> "Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-00 and draft-ietf-codec-description-00 (2)"
> 2011-03-23
> • ID # 1520
> "Qualcomm Incorporated's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
> 2011-03-27
> • ID # 1524
> "Xiph.Org Foundation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
> 2011-03-29
> • ID # 1526
> "Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
> 2011-03-29
> • ID # 1525
> "Skype Limited's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
> 2011-07-23
> • ID # 1602
> "Skype Limited's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-codec-opus-07"
> 2012-01-25
> • ID # 1670
> "Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-10"
> 2012-03-12
> • ID # 1712
> "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-11 (1)"
> 2012-04-02
> • ID # 1741
> "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-11 (2)"
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>