Re: [rtcweb] Agenda time request for draft-marjou-rtcweb-audio-codecs-for-interop-01

Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com> Wed, 13 March 2013 20:11 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@phonefromhere.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 43BA011E80D2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 13:11:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 K6ovZOdJXNfC for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 13:11:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp004.apm-internet.net (smtp004.apm-internet.net [85.119.248.54]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 568E111E814B for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 13:11:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 17546 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2013 20:11:36 -0000
X-AV-Scan: clean
Received: from unknown (HELO zimbra003.verygoodemail.com) (85.119.248.218) by smtp004.apm-internet.net with SMTP; 13 Mar 2013 20:11:36 -0000
Received: from zimbra003.verygoodemail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra003.verygoodemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A5518A02C5; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 20:11:36 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [192.67.4.33] (unknown [192.67.4.33]) by zimbra003.verygoodemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A38318A0203; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 20:11:36 +0000 (GMT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <5140D73D.2080209@mozilla.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 20:11:35 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <BD920E7C-85FE-4D0A-BF8E-F14A91AA2C41@phonefromhere.com>
References: <E8F5F2C7B2623641BD9ABF0B622D726D0F68869E@xmb-rcd-x11.cisco.com> <CA+9kkMA7x18x3rD9PoPx-rA+4uz7ome3LjQ7sOWHDptz0zJX6g@mail.gmail.com> <CAErhfrx24SR5zwH3oHQi_PhFkfQjCmbMuatwEw2kjJ184MiUpw@mail.gmail.com> <5140D73D.2080209@mozilla.com>
To: Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org, Xavier Marjou <xavier.marjou@orange.com>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Agenda time request for draft-marjou-rtcweb-audio-codecs-for-interop-01
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: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 20:11:38 -0000

On 13 Mar 2013, at 19:45, Jean-Marc Valin wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 03/13/2013 09:14 AM, Xavier Marjou wrote:
>> - In order to reach a compromise, we would like to add some text in
>> the WG draft draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio providing incentives for the
>> browser to use these three codecs: make them mandatory to implement
>> when there is no cost impact on the browser (e.g. if codec already
>> installed, paid by the device vendor...).
> 
> I think this is the main faulty assumption here. "Royalties already
> paid" does not imply "free". There's a real cost here because
> supporting AMR, AMR-WB, G.722 and any other codecs added to that list
> means that:
> 1) Someone has to write all the code for actually using these codecs
> in their RTP stack.
> 2) There is no standard interface for accessing these codecs, so a
> browser vendor would have to write code for each of these (often
> undocumented) interface and *test* it on every device.
> 3) This code needs to be maintained and fixed for security
> vulnerabilities.
> 4) If there's any issue (e.g. buffer overflow) in the platform
> implementation of the codec, there's nothing the browser vendor can do
> about it.
> 
> Oh, and that cost would be paid by pretty much all browser vendors
> because they're all running on at least one platform that supports
> each of these codecs.

And that assumes that the codec license signed by the hardware maker permits the use of these 'no-cost' in all the possible ways
the javascript user wants. E.g. is it limited in number of channels ? Is the license symmetrical wrt encoding and decoding ?
Is it available to 3rd party browser makers (eg chrome on blackberry? Or to products derived from the native browser browsers
or that embed browser objects (like cordova/phonegap) ?

T.