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

Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> Fri, 01 November 2013 15:15 UTC

Return-Path: <emcho@sip-communicator.org>
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 8D72411E83A1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:15:09 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.733
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.733 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.244, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id wRAf1-RRU308 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:14:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pb0-f47.google.com (mail-pb0-f47.google.com [209.85.160.47]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B127311E8163 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:14:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pb0-f47.google.com with SMTP id rq13so308197pbb.20 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=5NmvNHyihtgAGgKpIh8TuaKMHnv55zcruZQu0Y3KR2U=; b=B7pHOdvbXSv/X8NjOKmp1CczqyHeTvsDLk3tvcdoOYe6NBq5NNqe3MR9L/PctWAYsZ 90bdayntIm/N9paZlAmhQ811x5T5OHzp2B061ZahFZfo0/esU8Iq72J9BNoTIlQy5XVk LIF131GSuSQ/JQaWO1rsCa5CQEJpFDFFZZDndQd8q9uaTpEgt/2wJHlh/OPxjyupOH9Y 0ZZEw1pqh9Nyyi7ORxEbgnsT1K0sPs0aDAv7dORHDc3aDz/F/MQ1pc1Y0MOYNjZrMczz jK7EG6NSpIG5wbQ1hGjLh6LlfPcSJ0yh+9Dgq7ANUrHuB7hFrWzZxh3CR5+LXhACJ6O+ RQFA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmEqw4zvCjpRFYHwAICc/Kfi2CbszN48nYytTqBKaeMcq4fbFuvUTTbYnDs+3eDpP5EKzxn
X-Received: by 10.66.123.5 with SMTP id lw5mr3629717pab.83.1383318895519; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:14:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-x231.google.com (mail-pa0-x231.google.com [2607:f8b0:400e:c03::231]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id v4sm11375312pbq.31.2013.11.01.08.14.54 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id lj1so4155546pab.22 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 10.68.164.165 with SMTP id yr5mr3720017pbb.146.1383318894868; Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:14:54 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.191.163 with HTTP; Fri, 1 Nov 2013 08:14:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B0C5BA1@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <527147FF.5010506@nostrum.com> <C72DB04F-F363-45A9-A51F-31900037C239@vipadia.com> <C81F0BD3-F5E6-4E1A-955D-16D55E698BD1@edvina.net> <5272C6C8.3070006@gmail.com> <CABcZeBM6T0a9iLHVujzAiwFi5X5=S0oNK=xR3=FkHM2wi5bngQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAL02cgTwJwf27PuxGhhZAZgDN2jguxhNFBNPeJC4W1dwd5jzYA@mail.gmail.com> <5273A746.4060504@viagenie.ca> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B0C5BA1@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com>
From: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 16:14:34 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPvvaaJjHDHaocbAs+WR7pbqjECwpcs8bT4M_GgCwtFFzNqdVQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] On the topic of MTI video 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, 01 Nov 2013 15:15:09 -0000

On Fri, Nov 1, 2013 at 3:27 PM, DRAGE, Keith (Keith)
<keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
>
> That ownership means they are also take responsibility for any of the liabilities arising
> from defective code they so distribute. I see no reason why Cisco would want to do
> that under anything but a controlled evironment, which would have its own set of
> non-trivial costs.

They could have the same by distributing x264 binaries that they have
compiled by themselves.

One of the things in the Cisco grand, that sound a bit incoherent to
me is their declared will on building a healthy open source community
around their implementation. Specifically, what baffles me is that
there is already a very well oiled implementation that does a lot more
than just baseline. That implementation already has a vibrant
community, significant popularity and, again, it sounds like it would
be considerably superior to what Cisco are planning on rolling out in
OpenH264.

In addition to wondering at the pure waste of resources (with a casual
reference to NIH), potential contributors could legitimately ask "why
would we contribute to your project when you made the exact opposite
choice when faced with the decision?".

Emil

--
https://jitsi.org