Re: [rtcweb] SVC

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 18 October 2012 13:44 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 8C7F821F84E2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:44:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.424
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.424 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.175, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, 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 23xQb0V4FHlM for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:44:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28B0D21F8720 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 06:44:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 40DE439E0F3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:44:43 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1lJ10Qs1fdhX for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:44:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hta-dell.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:1043:1:be30:5bff:fede:bcdc]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 58BA739E04C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:44:41 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <508007C8.7070508@alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2012 15:44:40 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121011 Thunderbird/16.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <BLU402-EAS132985293218775DEC6C9FC93700@phx.gbl>
In-Reply-To: <BLU402-EAS132985293218775DEC6C9FC93700@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] SVC
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, 18 Oct 2012 13:44:46 -0000

On 10/16/2012 07:35 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> Some chipsets do support temporal scaling (search 'soc support for H.264/SVC'), and there are sw implementations that support temporal, quality and spatial scaling ( http://www.polycom.com/company/news/press-releases/2012/20121004.html).
I did search for what you suggested, but what came up seemed to be 
software running on System-on-a-chip processors (eInfochips' C library 
from 2009, an IEEE Explore article detailing an implementation running 
on a Linux system with a DSP). Your search results may be different.

These may have satisfactory performance - using DSPs for video codec 
tasks kind of blurs the distinction between "hardware implementation" 
and "software implementation". But I guess that the more the processors 
are general purpose, the less it matters which particular codec you 
choose to implement on them - so they become irrelevant to whether a 
particular codec has "hardware support".

                  Harald