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

Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> Thu, 31 October 2013 12:11 UTC

Return-Path: <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.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 D99B711E8115 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 05:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.3
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_74=0.6, NO_RELAYS=-0.001]
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 p-jJ-09gTHL0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 05:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oa0-x233.google.com (mail-oa0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD51B11E8151 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 05:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id h1so2892009oag.24 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 05:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=b2j2+tEwpvROObJ1zEoRXqj9EQ6LhEO+K4xC1AyZy3k=; b=Q77bj3kRT3tdnKV37crWTACnR82ZBpFo1RDAZj2Xd7Rh+w/MRAnFF/kY2oE8q4kdeJ Zebek8WZ7N+96OfZBDYhy8+vY4qlLVw/Qz9iwoetx18XXRoyun63UkTSS95T/kpsuJ2y gq1LFeJJ0xRXxe4l+O84p+ribfUPPFsVqU0nU9tBaa174WuKqLRWzSdpThs/ytu/a8p0 OACJcbMsmyqFWvH8TjI8on0Oo3teLvhzp0Q0X2ggKQdiu3y3uv3fveWbQasmUhATBO0r 4NYmRyu5l2VDgCkJcyMIV4UNyIwXt50dxRsoXdpMQn7Yc3X0b8uN6Gcj8mNZNuADFnIr rWew==
X-Received: by 10.60.50.168 with SMTP id d8mr44264oeo.77.1383221511403; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 05:11:51 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.76.94.40 with HTTP; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 05:11:31 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB123CFB76A@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
References: <527147FF.5010506@nostrum.com> <CAGgHUiRH81UAmLaan=MRGuk-RoJBuCJ7SsuB5516TiZcNi8FFA@mail.gmail.com> <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB123CFB76A@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:11:31 +1100
Message-ID: <CAHp8n2n+_Ta7SLrrztcSKj9qTzrP=w_-tj4bFZW8DWevXn6XiA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
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: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 12:11:54 -0000

On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
<fluffy@cisco.com> wrote:
>
> On Oct 30, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Leon Geyser <lgeyser@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately like Jonathan pointed out H.264 will only be able to be used royalty free on certain(most popular) platforms.
>> To be able to avoid negotiation failure we need a MTI codec that every potential now/future browser would be able to implement freely.
>> I like what Cisco did, but the solution seems a bit half-baked.
>>
>
> I think that Mozilla put it pretty nicely in their blog. What this annoucement gives us is not a perfect world. Mozilla is working towards a better future but in the mean time, this is the best thing we could possibly figure out on how to make the internet today be the best it can be for users.


This is a very grand gesture of CISCO.

I'm just a bit cautious, since it looks too good to be true: have you
considered that MPEG LA could change the license conditions on H.264
next year and make this impossible?

Regards,
Silvia.