Re: [rtcweb] Microsoft tells W3C and IETF what we are doing no signs of offering real world interoperability

Rohit Puri <rohit.puri@tenhands.net> Mon, 06 August 2012 19:27 UTC

Return-Path: <rohit.puri@tenhands.net>
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 C18BF21E8088 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:27:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.976
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 eN-umUmT3xM2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yx0-f172.google.com (mail-yx0-f172.google.com [209.85.213.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A225721E808A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by yenm5 with SMTP id m5so1053640yen.31 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 12:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=02Q1umjCvxSs7XahA8D70zHbcffoo0rldHuWzmOCPas=; b=KtJmAwxTKmnPUuZCpg5T4zJ1yS6t0Vdo0b1W4xPMZfGAG9LwTZ4SOWRfOUNlOuS5k+ fZU3IYVJBQBVeuESO4brBvRICVy2STSweeFWkns9jf6A6Gq7JJRj5nXpvZdvPqHt6Afo ZRhY+jbqkTTEeG7/z3ARgIaBXljWCUDNTIRm15wOOsoS2NiwxZlRPm2zqD0sZzbjOAYa 1Oq9LUAqFWI6O9QtLJNWRLhZslZA6WIZ7OCAJdT8AnDoPSZot3XkKWeVmRMgMbrhK5B+ x2xCc4q6uUqLG4hdQBmfaULWRdJWJqFZlpkpnPRwyAi2fjzoMKE+l4gH1L3ds6x5fYZJ iNLw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.3.42 with SMTP id 10mr20768947oez.5.1344281252070; Mon, 06 Aug 2012 12:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.76.143.38 with HTTP; Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:27:32 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CACHLvecT1AgJRo=xM5AH-fGZn+iYrtHqWk7Eym8QJn9U7YGcsg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <53223349-A31F-4381-899F-82E29B0A0B6C@cisco.com> <CACHLvecT1AgJRo=xM5AH-fGZn+iYrtHqWk7Eym8QJn9U7YGcsg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 12:27:32 -0700
Message-ID: <CAPk5xQv_ZNqo66LfApshWtRrvXuBMscnp3+kY_GMiibgD1BCqw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Rohit Puri <rohit.puri@tenhands.net>
To: Luca De Cicco <ldecicco@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1ff1482043704c69ddef6
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQmqLR/gOOSfieITs5s3opFNW0MaqNcgZVHr4b0QIr/6WVBK7wNeoJ7TFHjjNmN/cXJ00TEL
Cc: "Cullen Jennings \(fluffy\)" <fluffy@cisco.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Microsoft tells W3C and IETF what we are doing no signs of offering real world interoperability
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: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:27:34 -0000

Based on our experiences at TenHands Inc. where we are trying to build a RT
video-centric collaboration service, the goal cited in MSFT proposal (
http://html5labs.com/cu-rtc-web/cu-rtc-web.htm), namely:

"*Flexibility in its support of popular media formats and codecs as well as
openness to future innovation*—A successful standard cannot be tied to
individual codecs, data formats or scenarios. They may soon be supplanted
by newer versions, which would make such a tightly coupled standard
obsolete just as quickly. The right approach is instead to to support
multiple media formats and to bring the bulk of the logic to the
application layer, enabling developers to innovate. "

sounds like a great idea.

I have not gone through the MSFT proposal yet and do not consider myself to
be a browser expert, but if it were possible to have flexibility in the
webRTC framework to the extent that a client developer could use their own
"algorithms" in the media pipeline, that would be awesome. Concretely, some
algorithms that come to mind include (a) pre-processing of captured media
(b) any choice of codecs (b) bandwidth adaptation (c) post-processing of
decoded media (d) CPU adaptation.  There is probably many more.



On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Luca De Cicco <ldecicco@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think that the proposed "customizable response to changing network
> quality" is a good idea.
> Wiring the adaptation logic into webrtc would make it less flexible to
> different needs in particular
> applications. Of course a default adaptation logic should be implemented
> in the browser.
>
> Cheers,
> --
> Luca De Cicco, PhD
> Politecnico di Bari
> Dipartimento di Elettrotecnica ed Elettronica
> Via Re David, 200 - Bari - ITALY
> Office: +39 080 596 3851
>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) <fluffy@cisco.com
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> I see that Microsoft decided to wait until the W3C and IETF were close to
>> done before putting together a proposal that, if accepted, would explode
>> most the current works and create maximal delay on this work.
>>
>> http://blogs.skype.com/en/2012/08/customizable_ubiquitous_real_t.html
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>


-- 
Thanks and best regards,

Rohit Puri (rohit.puri@tenhands.net)
Software Development, TenHands Inc. (www.tenhands.net)
My TenHands URL: http://tenhands.net/rohit.puri@tenhands.net