Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question
Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com> Thu, 01 November 2012 08:39 UTC
Return-Path: <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.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 CC58821F84BE for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 01:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -106.249
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-106.249 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 oqd9aJGo30KV for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 01:39:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw1.ericsson.se (mailgw1.ericsson.se [193.180.251.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1B0621F8498 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 01:39:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb2d-b7f1e6d000002d2c-36-50923526fc92
Received: from esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by mailgw1.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id 77.24.11564.62532905; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 09:39:02 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (153.88.115.8) by esessmw0197.eemea.ericsson.se (153.88.115.88) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 8.3.279.1; Thu, 1 Nov 2012 09:39:02 +0100
Message-ID: <50923524.70109@ericsson.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 09:39:00 +0100
From: Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121010 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Matthew Kaufman <matthew.kaufman@skype.net>
References: <FDBFA77C7400C74F87BC297393B53E352595FBA9@BY2PRD0710MB354.namprd07.prod.outlook.com> <5091415E.4030902@alvestrand.no> <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A484160FE0FF@tk5ex14mbxc272.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <AE1A6B5FD507DC4FB3C5166F3A05A484160FE0FF@tk5ex14mbxc272.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.4.5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFprALMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+Jvra6a6aQAgy0fZCxm3DrLYrH2Xzu7 A5PHkiU/mTxuPZjEFsAUxWWTkpqTWZZapG+XwJWx8mILe8Fjvorb/5YwNjC+5e5i5OSQEDCR uLdkFiOELSZx4d56ti5GLg4hgZOMEqenXGKFcJYxSnSdPsEMUsUroCnRsv4oC4jNIqAi8XFW J5jNJmAhcfNHI1A3B4eoQLDE845iiHJBiZMzn4CViAjoS/Rsvs4KYjMLqEvcWXyOHcQWFjCT 2NU+BSwuJHCNUWLN+0AQm1MgUWJCwxtmiOMkJd6+f8UM0asnMeVqCyOELS/RvHU2M0SvtkRD UwfrBEahWUhWz0LSMgtJywJG5lWM7LmJmTnp5YabGIGhenDLb90djKfOiRxilOZgURLn5Ura 7y8kkJ5YkpqdmlqQWhRfVJqTWnyIkYmDU6qBcdZd2cONW5gqn7NxJDQzPpj09FfKHOsFvhIq zIE9RgWHxG8cb2ovrqyRDDmVoC6rqv0oxOyny1SGMkZxpukz1QrnqifnSXxv8p26V7KbeVLl FIG6n6yPjj1oPrD6cIjkxfK1exnvWJp/v+678tV0p6AfZRstt73bcC9hsvvzQAsbnxOxvLbX lViKMxINtZiLihMBeouq6SMCAAA=
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question
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, 01 Nov 2012 08:39:04 -0000
On 2012-10-31 17:25, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > Harald Alvestrand: >> >> However, I believe that my opinion is based enough in facts that >> it's unlikely that I'll be swayed by a presentation given at the >> IETF; reading the drafts of the H.264 proponents certainly did not >> change it. >> > > Perfect. If everyone can read the drafts ahead of time and make up > their mind then we can spend valuable face-to-face time on the > existing issues plus the three (or more) new items that are coming > out of W3C this week instead of on the predetermined codec > discussion. Matthew, Your standpoint that any time spent on codec selection is meaningless has been made clear. I as chair however strongly believe that it is important that we run through the process we have outlined and announced. It is possible that the result in Atlanta will be the same as the one in Paris, but it might also be different. If I was certain about the outcome we would not spend time on this topic. But there is a number of people in this WG for which this topic is an important one. Regarding new issues coming out of the W3C it would be good if someone could fill in the rest of the WG what has occurred. Trying to have this WG respond to such raised issues without giving people time to think over the issues and any proposals would be problematic. So what are the issue that you like to discuss. Cheers Magnus Westerlund ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Ericsson AB | Phone +46 10 7148287 Färögatan 6 | Mobile +46 73 0949079 SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------
- [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question John Leslie
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Sergio Garcia Murillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Chenxin
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Cullen Jennings
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Ron
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Stephan Wenger
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Ron
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Roni Even
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Lorenzo Miniero
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Olle E. Johansson
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Ron
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question David Singer
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Richard Shockey
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Paul Kyzivat
- Re: [rtcweb] Form of the video codec question Magnus Westerlund