IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio Codecs

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Thu, 27 December 2012 16:17 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.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 693BE21F8D71 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:17:01 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 ha9pZPIGgwmA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:17:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com [173.37.86.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8812C21F8D55 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 08:17:00 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2115; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1356625020; x=1357834620; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=ehrTgQCiNYErYnynYoDVreJxcVmRX3Lhkee+sdX4Tds=; b=dZZv5GusrTsrKedCODR/6uS3gyaVYzvU0OQvcPmw3kf31aKqTTmWZzET sCulHg6vX4V2gSHEhVx5ZiCXKkOGeovXjrG7xN1mxzHX3fCH2S3E6hyxb ykvFAivUjtLRhi0kWRI1NqkNRWryROWhkShe6Aq2BLN9bI+1fFEu/+tRD M=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EABFz3FCtJV2a/2dsb2JhbABFvWMWc4IeAQEBAwEdHT8FCwIBCBgKFBAyJQIEDgUIiAUGti6MV4NiYQOmVIJ0giI
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,363,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="156905531"
Received: from rcdn-core-3.cisco.com ([173.37.93.154]) by rcdn-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP; 27 Dec 2012 16:16:59 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com [173.36.12.87]) by rcdn-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qBRGGxL8014160 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:16:59 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.230]) by xhc-aln-x13.cisco.com ([173.36.12.87]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Thu, 27 Dec 2012 10:16:59 -0600
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio Codecs
Thread-Index: AQHN5CzDDpQPLzmK20mNPcVtrlHf1ZgtN2qA
Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2012 16:16:58 +0000
Message-ID: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB113323E96@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
References: <50D2CC6A.4090500@ericsson.com> <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7623356EF@008-AM1MPN1-041.mgdnok.nokia.com> <50D3E3BF.7070609@mozilla.com> <50D48DD8.3050702@nostrum.com> <5BEDD27D-B359-4CD4-B01C-427E6BB1372A@standardstrack.com> <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB113323681@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com> <30CCEF02-8AB3-49DE-AF6D-C03B1005F9CC@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <30CCEF02-8AB3-49DE-AF6D-C03B1005F9CC@phonefromhere.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.20.249.167]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <3E93F65FF3E1E147A01226E726064BAA@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio 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, 27 Dec 2012 16:17:01 -0000

On Dec 27, 2012, at 5:21 AM, Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
 wrote:

> 
> On 26 Dec 2012, at 17:18, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On Dec 25, 2012, at 5:29 AM, Eric Burger <eburger-l@standardstrack.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> 
>>> We then either have a nice big section in this present document describing the current state of the art of various networks with various codecs *OR* we have an Informational Implementor's Guide that describes the current state of the art of various networks, as well as the pitfalls of popular but hard codecs, like G.722.
>> 
>> Would someone be willing to summarize a list of codecs that at some people have argued strongly in favor of along with the main advantage of thawing that codec. I'm thinking of a list that looks something like
>> 
>> AMR-WB   Gets you interop with existing 3GPP 
> 
> Haha. As if just having the code was going to allow you to interop with existing 3gpp !

ok - point take than more that is needed but what I'm look info for is the one line bumper sticker style summary of why people feel they want some given codec. 


> How about: 
> 
> AMR-WB   Might slightly help your interop struggles  with 3gpp - will definitely land you with a license bill and a user counting problem.
> 
>> 
>> Having a list like this would be a handy quick references to discussion.
> 
> Have we agreed to have a discussion ? 
> I thought this was talks about talks to overthrow an existing decision.
> 
> If we are in the mood to throw out existing decisions, I've a few I'd like to revisit .....

Just to be clear, we are not talking about tossing out previous decisions. When we decided to make OPUS MTI, we at the same time agreed to not rule out other codecs in the future. That was part of how we got to consensus on OPUS.  We are in the middle of a consensus call on that topic of looking and other codecs and reading the messages on that consensus call, it's a bit hard to figure out what codecs people might want to talk about and why.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email