Re: [rtcweb] Video codec selection - way forward

"cb.list6" <cb.list6@gmail.com> Thu, 14 November 2013 04:11 UTC

Return-Path: <cb.list6@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 235AC11E80DE for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:11:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.459
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.459 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.140, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 S0FqBArRKMgR for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:11:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-we0-x236.google.com (mail-we0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c03::236]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ECD611E812A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:11:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-we0-f182.google.com with SMTP id x55so1344898wes.27 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:11:25 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=OrT6qzNAeOVwBnrNGuOd4p6KhX8nAmsux4yvKeTPBq0=; b=ZwesNrMK4MXBYbhadHlfxwoNQTUerj7shWCPSnQNUZqkq4Qr7XWAiCn7nlYpobQreh pBKtIYExIaIrzBpMZkspYAuzFQ8eYVcX8Uwia0Ug9/ggKQdf0GOiZPRcIItlYAD7JV8I 2WCPdSdavASNnlzN/7OsP9M2Bc+vwbBQQU0xVP0YZD/T5rNqKGLi6WuGciXytuOGuNgT AITbYsMaLCIzL8sD/bUtXeUiOEP+hkinb3SqPQ0TY946z1HW2I8Kpveu2uP1dpmQYgZy eTSzRsqlWos8ShjaRmI5W9qlN+bbrt8TGWUy3pWehfyFR73g7b14OfoDCfvbgB8cVyIW qp3w==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.194.187.101 with SMTP id fr5mr222483wjc.76.1384402285774; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:11:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.99.68 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:11:25 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.99.68 with HTTP; Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:11:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <5283DFDC.4010906@ericsson.com>
References: <5283DFDC.4010906@ericsson.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2013 20:11:25 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD6AjGQwhmhmpJh7=ORYc=FRQMnOO=1vCNMCmXaYFXmC71rKMQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: "cb.list6" <cb.list6@gmail.com>
To: Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7bd6b9ac784dd404eb1b46e6
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Video codec selection - way forward
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, 14 Nov 2013 04:11:38 -0000

Why no SHOULD implement vp8 and h248? SHOULD means you will do it unless
you have a real good reason.

MUST is too hard for this WG.  Many implementations have a really good
reason to not do vp8 OR h248.

Saying that all webrtc MUST do one or the other or both is disingenuous.

SHOULD for both is as good as we are going to get with this complicated IPR
environment.  Using MUST is simply not going to work and we have 10,000 on
this mailer to back that up.

Cameron
On Nov 13, 2013 12:24 PM, "Gonzalo Camarillo" <
Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>; wrote:

> Folks,
>
> I hope everybody had a safe trip back home after Vancouver.
>
> As you all know, we need to make progress regarding the selection of the
> MTI video codec. The following are some of the alternatives we have on
> the table:
>
>  1. All entities MUST support H.264
>  2. All entities MUST support VP8
>  3. All entities MUST support both H.264 and VP8
>  4. Browsers MUST support both H.264 and VP8
>  5. All entities MUST support either H.264 or VP8
>  6. All entities MUST support H.261
>  7. There is no MTI video codec
>
> If you want the group to consider additional alternatives to the ones
> above, please let the group know within the following *two weeks*. At
> that point, the chairs will be listing all the received alternatives and
> proposing a process to select one among them.
>
> Please, send your proposals in an email to the list. You do not need to
> write a draft; just send the text you would like to see in the final
> document regarding video codecs.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gonzalo
> Responsible AD for this WG
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>