Re: [rtcweb] Video codecs: Clear positions....

cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> Tue, 09 December 2014 18:14 UTC

Return-Path: <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92C261A1A11 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 10:14:42 -0800 (PST)
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=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id zZmF8FDkK735 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 10:14:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ie0-f170.google.com (mail-ie0-f170.google.com [209.85.223.170]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 87B0A1A0161 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 10:14:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ie0-f170.google.com with SMTP id rd18so1045672iec.29 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:14:39 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=nPHyspFsbqzELJvUzgZaMsH/X9Y4NjHJedv3yWZec/U=; b=cQNZ8vCmoOMF+exJufRBWUHPC92GXbQgTNikpqupqQ1s/+c7YFFrIRzvOq3hSxws85 GrTYkI17DXmSA8rRyQQ/Q1JuXLe+uli39c9ocKNLswZzvW1bcrfhfisUws+NCzJAdqcS ElgFVzGRpz9YL/zhUjL9dJyzqF1zoiX5suI+1r2qcee5aYnq3iwIk9ewvt+kTLMC5w2V CPylFd/f6K+Zta/BKq1V5yQ66cUCvf0Qv9BbAxgpIiN1ZDhq7ja8k/+xCKdzME+EgJwk 32xHtHkEJbhIsdwLCgWZpS4aBtrKUs7mECumX+tdQ6PxZp/hZlVbSvz+wg2rqfT51Wu5 KqFg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm5aIblzR5Pea0zlJ3vqucb77VA6icMoAYe6gEmWKJvCsFSQfyjEB3xP3staJi1F0iOj5H7
X-Received: by 10.107.35.83 with SMTP id j80mr17597564ioj.55.1418148879747; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:14:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (206-248-171-209.dsl.teksavvy.com. [206.248.171.209]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id ck1sm5838235igb.0.2014.12.09.10.14.38 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Dec 2014 10:14:39 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <54873BD1.2030704@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 13:13:37 -0500
From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
References: <5486C48D.8040602@alvestrand.no> <F092E8C6-380C-4B20-B71F-449162617BC5@apple.com> <5487331F.8050404@bbs.darktech.org> <5487353D.8030106@gmail.com> <548736AC.6000407@bbs.darktech.org> <CANO7kWAuEg5Ft9XkUdqWrMi__pZ=o7tEy22HWUxeHyo-1bWS3Q@mail.gmail.com> <548737C7.1010102@bbs.darktech.org> <37CBED92-D820-491B-AFB0-0ED9E4FDEA99@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <37CBED92-D820-491B-AFB0-0ED9E4FDEA99@phonefromhere.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------010300040807060106040606"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/XvcHND0sp0mUSV5PlfkUh3GOfwc
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Video codecs: Clear positions....
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 18:14:42 -0000

On 09/12/2014 1:07 PM, Tim Panton wrote:
>
>> On 9 Dec 2014, at 17:56, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org 
>> <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>>
>> On 09/12/2014 12:55 PM, Simon Perreault wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 10:51 AM, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org 
>>> <mailto:cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>     That said, I echo Simon's point that until Apple and Microsoft
>>>     officially declare their intent to implement WebRTC they are not
>>>     "implicated", hence they should not really get to vote.
>>>
>>>
>>> Just for the record, I did not say that.
>>>
>>> Simon
>>
>> Sorry for misquoting you. I think it was Tim Panton who first hinted 
>> in this direction.
>
> I was being flippant.
>
> I do think however better standards emerge when people who consume 
> webAPIs or build services upon ietf protocols
> are included in the discussion, not just the established browser vendors.

I strongly agree for the general case, but maybe not in the case of MTI 
codecs.

If, for example, you were to argue that interoperability between browser 
and non-browser systems is of high importance then we should have a 
single MTI discussion across both systems. Right now we are advocating 
different MTIs for each system, which leads me to conclude that 
non-browser implementors are not implicated in the outcome of the 
browser-specific MTI codec.

Gili