Return-Path: <peter@andyet.net>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1])
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E17C1A88DD
 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:47:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5
 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001]
 autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44])
 by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id tbGlraafSBDn for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>;
 Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:47:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ie0-f174.google.com (mail-ie0-f174.google.com
 [209.85.223.174])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 013011A8851
 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:47:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ie0-f174.google.com with SMTP id x19so11761979ier.5
 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:47:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to
 :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type
 :content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=3PmNvcVkih37LBphCwrujzGm2jk7END4NJnBKhM1PbE=;
 b=a4B+Z7ym2G4/5LFjHSOMR1O9XCacV8Eq6PxFOrBbxZeriXo/smjW4qcLNWl78vIAFV
 g4Oq/tSuprdCcrSvzS3CTd4QbA47Ni1Y31ok4HNIG2aNAzyFndlrDz0X8GBL5We78vnp
 tG+TCWpsRRC/hUr41dZCwIH+HD3m1RjkQJ0W9bdy9kMc4vQuF3SRIeWaDms1IB0WGqcd
 20iTGxDIEq+tQmLV6SkCx+M6aamGw/Xz020LiwJFGVtpcM6DHWZzLdbWxtMC7B31W3gC
 /2marHbUfol9ZhKUZvG+pAaNNp5Pqplyp5F/lmiT5vu+R8NcB2p9QRPTiDnBnLw7i3xo
 Z8HA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnzdP7CeLKpAFZsSLJbJAEpk/qvTMzxP5SueCRUfHh7YVIpPy6bM4MoVz/5nts6wm4Zn0yJ
X-Received: by 10.42.27.9 with SMTP id h9mr45429219icc.32.1415735228415;
 Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:47:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from aither.local (c-73-34-202-214.hsd1.co.comcast.net.
 [73.34.202.214])
 by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 64sm10194447iol.37.2014.11.11.11.47.07
 for <multiple recipients>
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
 Tue, 11 Nov 2014 11:47:07 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <546267B9.8020605@andyet.net>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:47:05 -0700
From: Peter Saint-Andre - &yet <peter@andyet.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, 
 Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
References: <54601E19.8080203@nostrum.com>
 <176316D6-D685-45F4-AA8E-A4F07521CAE4@matthew.at>
 <1D5CFB04-2CCB-424C-A364-1CAA05E84D12@apple.com>
 <20141111011054.GR8092@hex.shelbyville.oz>
 <E18B79D1-D8C8-4A17-A2F0-93BDAAFED698@apple.com>
 <BE15C090-239F-45BC-8747-501AC86653B2@gmail.com>
 <5461A019.6030108@alvestrand.no>
 <1A6093A8-A7E9-4760-B790-CC767CAA2116@gmail.com>
 <546265E3.7060300@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <546265E3.7060300@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/G4DNkx2VON-V35NTSUjg5leS6EY
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] MTI Video Codec: a novel proposal
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 19:47:12 -0000

On 11/11/14, 12:39 PM, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> On 11/10/2014 10:48 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>>
>>> On Nov 10, 2014, at 7:35 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/10/2014 07:19 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>>>> I do not get it either. It seems like mobile apps (which count as devices) using a WEBRTC stack now have to include both codecs regardless of whether they need them. Do we really think app developers will pay attention? Why should they?
>>> Because they can then depend on interoperability with other non-browsers?
>> [BA] Isn't the non-browser in question the mobile app the developer wrote? Most of these apps only need to interop with the app on another platform, a browser app and/or their own service. So they typically only need one codec or the other not both.
> I'm pretty certain that will be the most common scenario.
>
> I'm also pretty certain this will not be the only scenario; there will
> be services that are usable from multiple applications.
>
> I don't want to foreclose that possibility.

What is a non-browser mobile app or native app in terms of the entity 
taxonomy from draft-ietf-rtcweb-overview? Is it a WebRTC device or a 
WebRTC-compatible endpoint?

It's nice that people don't want to foreclose possibilities, but I think 
it's important to recognize that one person's desire might turn out to 
be someone else's significant work effort.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://andyet.com/