IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Video codec proposals due October 15th, 2012

Monty Montgomery <xiphmont@gmail.com> Sat, 18 August 2012 21:28 UTC

Return-Path: <xiphmont@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 E5A5421F84CD for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 14:28:50 -0700 (PDT)
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 eqdgm7m8LcWp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 14:28:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ee0-f44.google.com (mail-ee0-f44.google.com [74.125.83.44]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 669BD21F847D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 14:28:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by eekb45 with SMTP id b45so1284017eek.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 14:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
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=zXDHNmIZ53b6LdPdZGXNsfSBAvA5HF7Xx2h8aoukUlE=; b=EZSV8qVQRSy7KI0SQmB8LlN8rjPdJtLiy3Hzm6DNV/0ejFRDKhmFf7G7rvQEWTvXd8 O3cK515vyReEXjYpLu2G9DPj7MEgBILOfw7KaNlMcBOuWvyEcJu6QhsdsNVZjvNSr5/3 uwuhnTCxN8CfHXmvi/LT39GKgRz1RjMEnZdnHMyzqQvoNYUtkJ/QdiLA2tA4WSSvrYFP IRzP7GSvhNXxeo3Kh0/UVbnC46NipvoTjkcND1sNSePfblGB//5rHecGcsyCkdBbLMYR eCwGksqYRsg82GobZLtfjgqcpM3AfJnY6QrvVCWEaSoua1GZb9ZaPSlWNboA6Hd9f2gr MiQA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.14.4.201 with SMTP id 49mr2591201eej.0.1345325325397; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 14:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.14.183.136 with HTTP; Sat, 18 Aug 2012 14:28:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <002801cd7d70$568c3210$03a49630$@us>
References: <CA+9kkMDwPjg8OW_Km1oaue=b-=U1FPouKL82s7POR1zNRiWhfA@mail.gmail.com> <002801cd7d70$568c3210$03a49630$@us>
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 17:28:45 -0400
Message-ID: <CACrD=+-x2x5ibOe3tr38OzXdpXhXypxkzbRwwrc1O5v6JRDctg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Monty Montgomery <xiphmont@gmail.com>
To: Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Video codec proposals due October 15th, 2012
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: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 21:28:51 -0000

On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us> wrote:
> To make my position clear. The WG should support both H 264 and VP8.

This misses the primary point of VP8: the fact that many stakeholders
here CANNOT implement h.264.  Every stakeholder can implement VP8.
Some refuse to do so as they have a sunk investment in h.264, but this
is not the same as 'cannot'.

> H 264 since it is nearly universally deployed.

You've lost me here.  I can't use it.  Oh sure, I have the code-- I'm
just not allowed to do anything with it, and MPEG-LA won't sell me a
license because I don't track downstream.

Monty
Xiph.Org

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status