Re: [rtcweb] Peter Dunkley's response (was: Straw Poll on Video Codec Alternatives)

[Peter Dunkley <[e-mail]>]

I am an implementer of "other entities".  From my personal point-of-view it
is perfectly OK if browsers must do both as long as I don't have to.

Browsers doing both and my not having to still allows my applications and
servers to interoperate with browsers - which is the key thing for me.

I am fully aware that this might not match other peoples requirements.

Regards,

Peter


On 20 December 2013 16:36, cowwoc <[e-mail]> wrote:

>  Peter,
>
> I assume 4b should be the same as 1b (since you'd still have to implement
> H.264).
>
> Gili
>
> On 20/12/2013 9:35 AM, Peter Dunkley wrote:
>
>  > 1. All entities MUST support H.264
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> Acceptable
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, I am concerned about the difficulty (in terms of licensing) of using
> H.264 on iOS, Windows Mobile, and similar platforms as the Cisco binary
> will not be usable in all cases.
>
>  > 2. All entities MUST support VP8
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> Yes
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> No
>
>  > 3. All entities MUST support both H.264 and VP8
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> Acceptable
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, I am concerned about the difficulty (in terms of licensing) of using
> H.264 on iOS, Windows Mobile, and similar platforms as the Cisco binary
> will not be usable in all cases.
>
>  > 4. Browsers MUST support both H.264 and VP8, other entities MUST
> support at least one of H.264 and VP8
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> Yes
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> No
>
>  > 5. All entities MUST support at least one of H.264 and VP8
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> No
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, this will not ensure interoperability which is the whole point of an
> MTI codec.
>
>  > 6. All entities MUST support H.261
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> No
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, as time goes on people will move away from H.264 and VP8 for better
> performing codecs. It would seem pointless to start off with such an old
> one.
>
>  > 7. There is no MTI video codec
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> No
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, interoperability is important and an MTI video codec will be needed
> for this.
>
>  > 8. All entities MUST support H.261 and all entities MUST support at
> least one of H.264 and VP8
>  > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> Acceptable
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, I don't like the idea of falling back to H.261 but this at least
> means there a good chance of a better codec being selected.
>
>  > 9. All entities MUST support Theora
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> No
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, as time goes on people will move away from H.264 and VP8 for better
> performing codecs. It would seem pointless to start off with such an old
> one.
>
>  > 10. All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.261}
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>  Acceptable
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, I don't like the idea of falling back to H.261 but this at least
> means there a good chance of a better codec being selected.
>
>  > 11. All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.263}
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>  No
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, there are licensing requirements for H.263 and unlike H.264 there is
> no Cisco (or other) binary to at least help with this on some platforms.
>
>  > 12. All entities MUST support decoding using both H.264 and VP8, and
> MUST support encoding using at least one of H.264 or VP8
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> Yes
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
>
>  > 13. All entities MUST support H.263
>  > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> No
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, there are licensing requirements for H.263 and unlike H.264 there is
> no Cisco (or other) binary to at least help with this on some platforms.
>
>  > 14. All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, Theora}
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> Acceptable
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, I don't like the idea of falling back to Theora but this at least
> means there a good chance of a better codec being selected.
>
>  > 15. All entities MUST support decoding using Theora.
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> No
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, as time goes on people will move away from H.264 and VP8 for better
> performing codecs. It would seem pointless to start off with such an old
> one.
>
>  > 16. All entities MUST support Motion JPEG
> > a. Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
> No
> > b. Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
> them:
> Yes, as time goes on people will move away from H.264 and VP8 for better
> performing codecs. It would seem pointless to start off with such an old
> one.
>
>
>  On 9 December 2013 17:24, Ted Hardie <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>>  Dear WG,
>>
>>  This is the email announcing the straw poll across the video codec
>> alternatives proposed to the WG. If you haven’t read the “Next Steps in
>> Video Codec Selection Process” (
>> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg10448.html )then
>> please do that before you continue to read.
>>
>>  The straw poll’s purpose is to make it clear to the WG which of the
>> alternatives that are favored or disfavored and what objections you have,
>> if any, against a particular alternative. The WG chairs will use the
>> information from this straw poll to identify an alternative to put as a
>> single consensus question to the group. Thus, everyone that has an opinion
>> on at least one alternative should answer this poll. Provide your poll
>> input by replying to this email to the WG mailing list. The poll will run
>> until the end of the 12th of January 2014.
>>
>>  As can be seen below, the poll lists the alternative that have proposed
>> to the WG. For each alternative two questions are listed.
>>
>>  The first question is “Are you in favor of this option
>> [Yes/No/Acceptable]:”. These three levels allow you to indicate that you:
>> Yes= I would be fine with the WG choosing this option. No = I really don’t
>> favor this, and it should not be picked. Acceptable = I can live with this
>> option but I prefer something else to be picked.
>>
>>  The second question is “Do you have any objections to this option, if
>> so please explain it:” If you have any objection at a minimum indicate it
>> with a “Yes”.   Please also add a short (1-sentence) summary of each of the
>> objections you believe applies.  (If you wish to provide a longer
>> explanation, please do so in a separate thread).  If you have no objection,
>> leave that question blank.
>>
>>  Please provide input on as many of the alternatives as you like and
>> feel comfortable to do. The more inputs, the more well informed decision
>> the WG chairs can take when identifying the option to be brought forward
>> for consensus. Any alternative that you chose to leave blank, will simply
>> be considered as one without any input from you.
>>
>>  WG participants, please do not comment on anyone’s input in this
>> thread! If you want to comment, then create a separate thread and change
>> the subject line to something else. Otherwise you are making life for the
>> chairs very difficult to track the results of this straw poll.
>>
>>  If discussion causes you to update your position, please feel free to
>> send an update via email on the straw poll thread prior to the closing date.
>>
>>
>>
>>    1.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support H.264
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        2.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support VP8
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        3.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support both H.264 and VP8
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        4.
>>
>>    Browsers MUST support both H.264 and VP8, other entities MUST support
>>    at least one of H.264 and VP8
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        5.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support at least one of H.264 and VP8
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        6.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support H.261
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        7.
>>
>>    There is no MTI video codec
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        8.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support H.261 and all entities MUST support at
>>    least one of H.264 and VP8
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        9.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support Theora
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        10.
>>
>>    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.261}
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        11.
>>
>>    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.263}
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        12.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support decoding using both H.264 and VP8, and MUST
>>    support encoding using at least one of H.264 or VP8
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        13.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support H.263
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        14.
>>
>>    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, Theora}
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        15.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support decoding using Theora.
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>        16.
>>
>>    All entities MUST support Motion JPEG
>>     1.
>>
>>       Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>>        2.
>>
>>       Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize
>>       them:
>>
>>
>>
>>  H.264 is a reference to the proposal in
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-burman-rtcweb-h264-proposal/<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-burman-rtcweb-h264-proposal/>
>>
>>  VP8 is a reference to the proposal in
>> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-vp8/<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-vp8/>
>>
>>  Theora is a reference to Xiph.org Theora Specification from March 16,
>> 2011 (http://www.xiph.org/theora/doc/Theora_I_spec.pdf)
>>
>>  H.263 is a reference to profile 0 level 70 defined in annex X of ITU-T
>> rec H.263 (http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.263/)
>>
>>  H.261 is a reference to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4587
>>
>>  Motion JPEG is a reference to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2435
>>
>>
>>  Thanks,
>>
>>  The Chairs
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>
>>
>
>
>  --
>  Peter Dunkley
> Technical Director
>  Crocodile RCS Ltd
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing [e-mail]://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>


-- 
Peter Dunkley
Technical Director
Crocodile RCS Ltd