Re: [rtcweb] Straw Poll on Video Codec Alternatives

[Gaelle Martin-Cocher <[e-mail]>]

Dear all,

Please find below my answer to the straw poll on video codec alternatives as requested by the Chairs
http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg10449.html


1.    All entities MUST support H.264

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:

1.    All entities MUST support 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:

-          Brings a higher cost or does not allow to interoperate with existing solutions/platforms.

-          VP8 is not yet a standard and would benefit of going through the full ISO process.

-          VP8 has a declaration of un-licensable IPR, https://ietf.org/ipr/2035/  .

1.    All entities MUST support both 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:

-          One MTI is enough if the codec provides “good enough” performances.

-          VP8 Brings a higher cost or does not allow to interoperate with existing solutions/platforms.

-          VP8 is not yet a standard and would benefit of going through the full ISO process.

-          VP8 has a declaration of un-licensable IPR, https://ietf.org/ipr/2035/  .

1.    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]: No

b.    Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize them:

-          There is no reason to make a distinction between browser and non-browser.

-          One MTI is enough if the codec provides “good enough” performances.

-          VP8 Brings a higher cost or does not allow to interoperate with existing solutions/platforms.

-          VP8 is not yet a standard and would benefit of going through the full ISO process.

-          VP8 has a declaration of un-licensable IPR, https://ietf.org/ipr/2035/  .

1.    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:

-          Does not insure interoperability

-          This is somewhat equivalent to no MTI while slowing down the widespread adoption of a more powerful codec by RTCWeb.

1.    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:

-          In terms of “old codecs” H263 would be a better choice.

-          It took years to remove H261 from specifications and platforms, RTCWeb should not mandate it back.

1.    There is no MTI video codec

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:

1.    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]: No

b.    Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize them:

-          In terms of “old codecs” H263 would be a better choice than H261.

-          It took years to remove normative support of H261 from specifications and platforms, RTCWeb should not mandate it back.

-          VP8 Brings a higher cost or does not allow to interoperate with existing solutions/platforms.

-          VP8 is not yet a standard and would benefit of going through the full ISO process.

-          VP8 has a declaration of un-licensable IPR, https://ietf.org/ipr/2035/  .

1.    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:

-          Not widely supported in hardware

-          Licensing status is not clear enough

1.    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, 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:

-          In terms of “old codecs” H263 would be a better choice than H261.

-          It took years to remove H261 from specifications and platforms, RTCWeb should not mandate it back.

-          VP8 Brings a higher cost or does not allow to interoperate with existing solutions/platforms.

-          VP8 is not yet a standard and would benefit of going through the full ISO process.

-          VP8 has a declaration of un-licensable IPR, https://ietf.org/ipr/2035/  .

1.    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.263}

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:

1.    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]: No

b.    Do you have any objections to this option, if so please summarize them:

-          VP8 Brings a higher cost or does not allow to interoperate with existing solutions/platforms.

-          VP8 is not yet a standard and would benefit of going through the full ISO process.

-          VP8 has a declaration of un-licensable IPR, https://ietf.org/ipr/2035/  .

1.    All entities MUST support H.263

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:

1.    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, 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:

-          Theora is not widely supported in hardware

-          Theora’s licensing status is not clear enough

-          VP8 Brings a higher cost or does not allow to interoperate with existing solutions/platforms.

-          VP8 is not yet a standard and would benefit of going through the full ISO process.

-          VP8 has a declaration of un-licensable IPR, https://ietf.org/ipr/2035/

1.    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:

-          Not widely supported in hardware

-          Licensing status is not clear enough

1.    All entities MUST support Motion JPEG

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:


Sincerely,

Gaëlle


---------------------------------------------------------------------
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.