IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] RTCWEB needs an Internet Codec

"DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com> Thu, 30 August 2012 12:38 UTC

Return-Path: <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.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 CB14521F8514 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 05:38:24 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -109.791
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-109.791 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.458, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_FR=0.35, 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 IcLqe1w+Vx8z for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 05:38:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smail5.alcatel.fr (smail5.alcatel.fr [64.208.49.27]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBAAE21F84F5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 05:38:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com (FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com [135.120.45.63]) by smail5.alcatel.fr (8.14.3/8.14.3/ICT) with ESMTP id q7UCbtlc024770 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:38:19 +0200
Received: from FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.44]) by FRMRSSXCHHUB03.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com ([135.120.45.63]) with mapi; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:38:10 +0200
From: "DRAGE, Keith (Keith)" <keith.drage@alcatel-lucent.com>
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 14:38:09 +0200
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] RTCWEB needs an Internet Codec
Thread-Index: Ac2Gnhdit1wVn4oLSem1d8AH/KcrCAADe1Rw
Message-ID: <EDC0A1AE77C57744B664A310A0B23AE240CBCCD8@FRMRSSXCHMBSC3.dc-m.alcatel-lucent.com>
References: <p06240603cc63f3f41ca9@[99.111.97.136]> <503F46C5.2090607@alvestrand.no>
In-Reply-To: <503F46C5.2090607@alvestrand.no>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.69 on 155.132.188.13
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWEB needs an Internet Codec
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, 30 Aug 2012 12:38:25 -0000

Surely that argument extends to every possible codec.

If the codecs supported by both endpoints do not supply the characteristics needed for the communication, then you will get interoperability failure.

If I want more bandwidth or quality than OPUS supplies, then I will also get interoperability failure.

Keith

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf
> Of Harald Alvestrand
> Sent: 30 August 2012 11:56
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] RTCWEB needs an Internet Codec
> 
> The counterpoint is that having G.711 as the only MTI means that you get
> interoperability failure for any application in which G.711 sound
> quality is not acceptable.
> 
> This includes all applications involving music.
> 
> On 08/29/2012 06:30 PM, Randall Gellens wrote:
> > At 12:13 AM -0400 8/29/12, Roman Shpount wrote:
> >
> >>  I would argue G.711 should be the MTI codec. The rest can be left up
> >> to browser implementers.
> >
> > I agree.
> >
> >>  We can argue all we want, but the best royalty free low bitrate
> >> codec available will be the one everybody supports.
> >
> > Very good point, and why we should mandate only one audio codec.
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email