[rtcweb] Interoperability between browsers (MTI Video)

[Leon Geyser <[e-mail]>]

In my opinion there really is a need for a MTI video codec for
interoperability between browsers.

Here are some scenarios on MTI decisions:

-- Decide on no MTI codec:
This would split the browers in two sides.
Those who support VP8 and those who support H.264. The only way these would
be able to communicate with each other is by using a a transcoding server
between the two browsers. (I don't know what the cost impact would be.)
Or
No video stream is sent when two incompatible browsers communicate. Just
audio. Not ideal.

-- Decide on H.264:
This really is not an option unless it can be royalty free with no strings
attached. Only a few browser vendors would be able to implement H.264. This
will also result in: No video stream is sent when to incompatible browsers
communicate. Just audio. Not ideal.

--Decide on VP8:
This would be the ideal choice and there shouldn't be a reason not to
implement VP8.

--Decide on H.261:
This might be old tech, but browsers might be able to use H.261 without
paying any royalties and without transcoding.
The codec can be used at 352x288 resolution from 64Kbit/s to 2Mbit/s
Remember this is just a fallback for interoperability. Browsers will still
implement VP8 and/or H.264.

Here are some examples of what might happen:
Firefox/Chrome/Opera to Firefox/Chrome/Opera: VP8
Safari/IE to Safari/IE : H.264
Firefox/Chrome/Opera to Safari/IE : H.261 fallback

Atleast there is video instead of no Video. Any opinions?