IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] The MTI Codec Questions (what to ask and how to ask them)

Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> Tue, 04 November 2014 10:24 UTC

Return-Path: <emcho@sip-communicator.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 995AF1A0861 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 02:24:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 aNE_ak3_j2Vu for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 02:24:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pd0-f182.google.com (mail-pd0-f182.google.com [209.85.192.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A733C1A0043 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 02:24:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pd0-f182.google.com with SMTP id fp1so13464786pdb.13 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 02:24:33 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=qeq04xfA95Atajc2LoBtQztRcnHO3St6de73I4WgsUw=; b=XQM45b4LfF/oOXeoeXa4ozs4y2rNrdLiupZmals8+DXKu+Cb28sFtRl2Z65nIk59/W NtV0FPZgx+F1P4h6AWgXpjJYrZBHoCmOe86fkVcE8L+P+33PAorTQmaeC8haFuwDzByZ y0oPQM08FmQEKdmHYUSkV72OcpuOD0jjIhOAD6qYmS+67bYYoAtiUyNMw6vh7Yo8X4bB y0KGWmCn2mFJAy31uXEs78eLX2b2xGfzY+V3qVhrPbdpBJHexs9ir23wZ7aH1WzgNrgW 2LrZ6tLsdVa0k1lI66Broeap7kpKM6T1h++oboXw9YnfpEdvzLGWZpSmKLgg6ZCtvTRb 68Iw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQm2AtqtGyv4N2Qxh98MJfKW8/an9ulqvxBJ3VCx29598JrFgcdzpcrlYSvcowE0eNbvNBBB
X-Received: by 10.68.68.226 with SMTP id z2mr14963672pbt.107.1415096673112; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 02:24:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pa0-f48.google.com (mail-pa0-f48.google.com. [209.85.220.48]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id nz2sm9603pbb.29.2014.11.04.02.24.32 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Nov 2014 02:24:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pa0-f48.google.com with SMTP id ey11so14158435pad.35 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 02:24:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Received: by 10.66.194.39 with SMTP id ht7mr4397482pac.91.1415096672056; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 02:24:32 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.66.100.227 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Nov 2014 02:24:11 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ7v-3jrLXGqiTSk5Us8jHniGCCUQFfnb4v5SKUn=Li-Oz3AA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <98200BCB-ABC9-4BE0-B11D-B7AEC9F8B2A4@ieca.com> <54581E56.10407@matthew.at> <CAOJ7v-3jrLXGqiTSk5Us8jHniGCCUQFfnb4v5SKUn=Li-Oz3AA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 11:24:11 +0100
Message-ID: <CAPvvaaKGnEUfxvxwR_nUcEre4ycKeGY7WvH2y0ixvgukyJ+zwA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="047d7bf0c5d87618a5050705de7f"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/Y5rjxj0nZebg4_G_nxVLtQl6vnU
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] The MTI Codec Questions (what to ask and how to ask them)
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, 04 Nov 2014 10:24:35 -0000

Looking at the list of IETF attendees for that session [0] we see that
total meeting participation for the delta companies was:

Cisco: 118
Ericsson: 36

So, clearly someone was very sloppy when organizing the rtcweb MTI voting
flood. A participation of 21% and 28% respectively is indeed quite
embarassing.

Reopening the question in Hawaii would allow raising the awareness among
the non-voters and having the proper numbers attend this time.

*That* could constitute one important change since last time and, if so, it
would totally justify having the debate again.

[0] https://www.ietf.org/registration/ietf88/attendance.py

--sent from my mobile
On 04 Nov 2014 7:36 AM, "Justin Uberti" <juberti@google.com> wrote:

>
>>
>> ps. Doing this with hums at a meeting just encourages filling the room
>> with people who aren't participating in the process but whose employers
>> have asked them to stuff the room to increase the hum volume. Those people
>> will all stand up for question #1, then leave immediately after the hums
>> are completed. Just like last time.
>
>
> I am shocked -- shocked -- at these allegations of room stuffing in our
> beloved IETF.  Surely the blue
> <http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/88/bluesheets/bluesheets-88-rtcweb-01.pdf>
> sheets
> <http://www.ietf.org/proceedings/88/bluesheets/bluesheets-88-rtcweb-02.pdf>
> from IETF 88 (the last time we discussed codecs, on day 2) will put to rest
> these claims.
>
> Wait...
>
> CompanyDay2 RTCWEB AttendeesDay1 RTCWEB AttendeesDeltacisco251510mozilla12
> 120ericsson1055huawei1082google990alu642oracle550
> (stats shown for all company affiliations reported by 5 or more people)
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email