Re: [rtcweb] On the topic of MTI video codecs

Adam Roach <> Wed, 30 October 2013 18:30 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0694A21E814B for <>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 11:30:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.157
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.157 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.157, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_74=0.6, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id mYUrpvfUh7pa for <>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 11:30:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D8C911E8192 for <>; Wed, 30 Oct 2013 11:30:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (authenticated bits=0) by (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r9UIUkNU028065 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 30 Oct 2013 13:30:47 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 13:30:41 -0500
From: Adam Roach <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Leon Geyser <>
References: <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass ( is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] On the topic of MTI video codecs
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2013 18:30:55 -0000

On 10/30/13 13:20, Leon Geyser wrote:
> Unfortunately like Jonathan pointed out H.264 will only be able to be 
> used royalty free on certain(most popular) platforms.
> To be able to avoid negotiation failure we need a MTI codec that every 
> potential now/future browser would be able to implement freely.

Fortunately, as I pointed out in an earlier message, the stated 
intention of Cisco's project is to support as many platforms as the 
development community is willing to work on. In light of that fact: is 
there a specific existing and viable platform that you think cannot 
support H.264 already *and* cannot use the OpenH264 library?

If not, can you tell a credible story about how such a platform might arise?