Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs

Lishitao <lishitao@huawei.com> Fri, 24 August 2012 04:17 UTC

Return-Path: <lishitao@huawei.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 3E6CA21E8042 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 21:17:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.169
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.169 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=3.430, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 Ix1EBTa1Eaec for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 21:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dfwrgout.huawei.com (dfwrgout.huawei.com [206.16.17.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF2B921E8034 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 21:17:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from 172.18.9.243 (EHLO dfwdlp03-ep.huawei.com) ([172.18.9.243]) by dfwrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.3.5-GA FastPath) with ESMTP id AJR01577; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 20:17:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from DFWEML404-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.203) by dfweml202-edg.china.huawei.com (172.18.9.108) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 21:10:55 -0700
Received: from SZXEML424-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.163) by dfweml404-hub.china.huawei.com (10.193.5.203) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Thu, 23 Aug 2012 21:10:52 -0700
Received: from SZXEML534-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.2.70]) by szxeml424-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.163]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Fri, 24 Aug 2012 12:10:45 +0800
From: Lishitao <lishitao@huawei.com>
To: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs
Thread-Index: AQHNe9LENUMF/Hj3nEmo2lnRJlNz25dj6efA///0R4CABIQsUA==
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 04:10:45 +0000
Message-ID: <DA165A8A2929C6429CAB403A76B573A514696F7E@szxeml534-mbx.china.huawei.com>
References: <9E2843EA-EBB9-40B3-898C-6B5216FAE7A5@cisco.com> <20330_1345535870_50333F7E_20330_3420_1_2842AD9A45C83B44B57635FD4831E60A029156@PEXCVZYM14.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <5033A2FF.4000603@jesup.org>
In-Reply-To: <5033A2FF.4000603@jesup.org>
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Content-Language: zh-CN
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.138.73.37]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs
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: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 04:17:35 -0000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Randell Jesup
> Sent: Tuesday, August 21, 2012 11:02 PM
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs
> 
> > With respect to OPUS, it has currently no footprint on the market, its
> implementation complexity and resulting costs are unknown, including with
> respect to IPRs issues, and some performance aspects are still to be more
> deeply assessed, like for instance quality with packet losses and jitter which is a
> key issue for usage over internet.
> 
> Opus was designed within the IETF specifically to handle usage over the
> Internet better than existing codecs.
>

My understanding for choosing the MTI codec is to find the baseline so that the negotiation can be successful, 
We are not here to find the best one.

If we consider the situation that G.711 has been widely used on the market, mandating G.711 only as the baseline(MTI) is more appropriate

shitao.