IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Video codecs and the staw poll

"Jeremy Laurenson (jlaurens)" <jlaurens@cisco.com> Sun, 02 February 2014 22:02 UTC

Return-Path: <jlaurens@cisco.com>
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 517751A010E for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 14:02:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.035
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.035 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 gV-T1VQK0Vom for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 14:02:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E9231A00E8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 14:02:22 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=15363; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1391378538; x=1392588138; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:mime-version; bh=qbCAp89DVJfFA8RiH6/HOx1WtdWmQso6WkQxZKo+Bxw=; b=Af90GyHb9AxbpxhX5wJWW6DtciEVz1WHetzjJpWCM/R6wzbl9+JDcEXw kGCp2ezYQxS8JMQAJ9cuhXCGSwyvZW1Q4bTGZHEn3usCf7SDKRlTdBMZD JJ56aaKh3hEdXTp1Lca0PoyfGmpaGJJBlAQZcFxZgL1yALTv33sZRiZv0 k=;
X-Files: smime.p7s : 4459
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ah0FAGK/7lKtJV2c/2dsb2JhbABagww4V71DT4EBFnSCJQEBAQIBAQEBAWsLEAIBCA44AiULJQIEDgUJBYdvCA3MIBeOOAEBTweDJIEUBJA/gTKGOZIhgy2BcTk
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos; i="4.95,767,1384300800"; d="p7s'?scan'208,217"; a="301321305"
Received: from rcdn-core-5.cisco.com ([173.37.93.156]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP; 02 Feb 2014 22:02:17 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com [173.36.12.84]) by rcdn-core-5.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s12M2H1c012994 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Sun, 2 Feb 2014 22:02:17 GMT
Received: from xmb-rcd-x03.cisco.com ([169.254.7.52]) by xhc-aln-x10.cisco.com ([173.36.12.84]) with mapi id 14.03.0123.003; Sun, 2 Feb 2014 16:02:17 -0600
From: "Jeremy Laurenson (jlaurens)" <jlaurens@cisco.com>
To: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Video codecs and the staw poll
Thread-Index: AQHPIGJvWwji5s2uuECqN+RDdMY5sg==
Date: Sun, 02 Feb 2014 22:02:17 +0000
Message-ID: <D1A1086A-84C3-4161-8BF5-D34B4F68BDD5@cisco.com>
References: <BFDBDCA9-937E-4B90-97B1-A23EEB65CF9A@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <BFDBDCA9-937E-4B90-97B1-A23EEB65CF9A@iii.ca>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.82.245.71]
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_30CDF2B8-13AD-4AF5-8573-39F25E206704"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Video codecs and the staw poll
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: Sun, 02 Feb 2014 22:02:24 -0000

+1
Silence is golden 


On Jan 28, 2014, at 12:13 AM, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> wrote:

> 
> Dear WG,
> 
> After reviewing the poll results found here: http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/pdfWd2PIhOY9y.pdf the chairs concludes that the working group still believes that an MTI is required for the WebRTC ecology to develop.    There are a number of options which did not garner significant support; essentially only options 1, 2, 3, 4 seem to have enough support that they might be the eventual basis of working group consensus.  The chairs do not view the other options as having sufficient support to warrant further working group activity or discussion.
> 
> There is no obvious leader between VP8 and H.264, however, nor obvious support for selecting both.  Each has similar numbers of supporting positions and objections, and both have the support of well over half the participants in the straw poll.  Given that, we are no closer to being able to choose between them at this time.  
> 
> The chairs therefore propose tabling the discussion of a mandatory to implement video codec until about 6 week before the start of the IETF 91 meeting in November 2014. This is so that the working group can focus its energy on completing other work.  We do expect to begin work on the video document (draft-ietf-rtcweb-video) to meet its milestone of December, but initially without specifying which of the two codecs is the WG consensus for MTI.
> 
> When we return to the discussion, the working group chairs currently expect to run a consensus call on support for each codec to be mandatory to implement.  This expectation may change, however, based on new information or working group experience.
> 
> If anyone has concerns about tabling this discussion until September 29, 2014 please let us know by February 4.
> 
> Thank you, 
> 
> Cullen, Magnus, Ted <the chairs>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email