Re: [rtcweb] Query Regarding Mandatory audio codecs draft

Paul Coverdale <coverdale@sympatico.ca> Mon, 28 April 2014 13:46 UTC

Return-Path: <coverdale@sympatico.ca>
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 C32341A0A18 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 06:46:25 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, 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 OziNz_O0X33q for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 06:46:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc3-s33.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc3-s33.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.116.108]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E0811A0795 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 06:46:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU0-SMTP21 ([65.55.116.72]) by blu0-omc3-s33.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 28 Apr 2014 06:46:22 -0700
X-TMN: [rh2I5YYc7OREYYkDcPV/fAA5FUwHug1H]
X-Originating-Email: [coverdale@sympatico.ca]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP218AE95A6E03BA856CC468D0470@phx.gbl>
Received: from PaulNewPC ([184.147.38.66]) by BLU0-SMTP21.phx.gbl over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Mon, 28 Apr 2014 06:46:21 -0700
From: Paul Coverdale <coverdale@sympatico.ca>
To: "'Steev James'" <steev.a.james@gmail.com>, "'Jean-Marc Valin'" <jmvalin@mozilla.com>
References: <CAB1_PA7n64TzN4RPM27P0dQ=fMZNnueQ+kc_P6=2CWsioOq+7w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB1_PA7n64TzN4RPM27P0dQ=fMZNnueQ+kc_P6=2CWsioOq+7w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 09:46:18 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0044_01CF62C6.B4F95700"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0
Thread-Index: Ac9iw9uhCCquOqr/QPOOwKLn2TaMvAAIef9A
Content-Language: en-us
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Apr 2014 13:46:21.0698 (UTC) FILETIME=[3D463620:01CF62E8]
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/ZlelgDivhHbNy0g5s120l-cVmws
Cc: kiran.guduru@samsung.com, rtcweb@ietf.org, cary.bran@plantronics.com
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Query Regarding Mandatory audio codecs draft
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: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 13:46:25 -0000

I think we’re mixing up sampling frequency and bit-rate here.

 

By definition, G.711 uses a sampling frequency of 8 KHz and encodes each sample with an 8-bit logarithmically companded, encoding law (A or Mu), resulting in an output bit-rate of 64 kbit/s. 

 

Opus can operate with a number of different sampling frequencies (depending on the desired audio bandwidth) and output bit-rates, including 64 kbit/s.

 

The point I was trying to make is that, even if both codecs provide the same numerical bit-rate, they are not compatible between end-points. If a legacy end-point can only support G.711, it’s no good sending it anything else but G.711.

 

...Paul

 

From: Steev James [mailto:steev.a.james@gmail.com] 
Sent: Monday, April 28, 2014 5:26 AM
To: Jean-Marc Valin
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org; coverdale@sympatico.ca; kiran.guduru@samsung.com; cary.bran@plantronics.com
Subject: Re:Query Regarding Mandatory audio codecs draft

 

Means you say that G.711 uses less bandwidth than Opus at the expense of complexity.

Am I right ?

 

On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Jean-Marc Valin <jmvalin@mozilla.com> wrote:

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

So, if the other endpoint only supports G.711 (legacy), then it
doesn't matter which codec you offer first. The the other endpoint
supports both Opus and G.711, but only at 8 kHz, then it comes down to
which of complexity or bandwidth is more important. On a corporate LAN
you'd likely want to use G.711 while for chatting from your home,
you'd usually want Opus. This is why the draft makes has no SHOULD
when it comes to narrowband.

        Jean-Marc


On 28/04/14 12:40 AM, Steev James wrote:
> Paul, What do you say, if another end point is using both G.711 and
> Opus at 8kHz and why ?
>
> Steev.
>
>
>
>>> Is that means spec is recommending G.711 (PCMA/PCMU) for
>>> sampling
> rate
>>> less than or equal to 8 kHz?
>>
>> No. Opus is still a good idea for 8 kHz, but it's not 2119
>> RECOMMENDED since there are valid (mostly complexity-related)
>> reasons to use G.711 despite the higher bit-rate.
>>
>> Jean-Marc
>
> Opus isn't a good idea for 8 KHz if you are trying to inter-operate
> with another end-point using G.711.
>
> ...Paul
>
>
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTXezkAAoJEJ6/8sItn9q9DfEIAKy6ZPCE7o/dyBFhpt5tGpds
XRDUiR++S89H4blgJOsR5nzzmkGwN+onN4cwBfz4Tbvi0Q7Q/UyzdlBePekC4gwL
wrQL2/fwxfTnB0T6yfn2rrCd+i7jVWf2xJz0xJIY2qYAxYVg469PzeGMHTJK1+1x
S1BDRZHZp4X/nSShthdthHvkfHrVPq5pDzexCfBc2h56+9Z3K1COdQlVZD/UJwQy
twp8p6755LzucV4KdvN5NM5w9rjySBTAaUElU0WkyMPfRppowAkFhJunoJCTeIW9
8Stsm5yrAeasQhe9mlubceIYsTyjGfKkoO1RVkQUB2YwzctqyMnK14ZYJQbg8Us=
=Ys9g
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----