Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio Codecs

[Andrew Allen <[e-mail]>]

I also support 2)

I really don't think it helps much to describe what other codecs are out there that you might want to think about implementing if you want to interoperate with certain other non RTCweb deployments. I think anybody who is seriously thinking about developing such a product can easily find this out for themselves - if you want to interoperate with 3GPP devices then take a look at the CURRENT 3GPP Codec specifications!

It should be realized that the codec life cycle tends to be somewhat shorter than that of the signaling technology so the codec information is likely to become out of date long before the signaling specifications become obsolete (possibly already dated by the time the RFC is published) - 3GPP is already working on a new codec for LTE!

As everyone has a favorite codec they would like to see deployed the downside of this is that this will likely become a distraction that generates a lot of discussion and consumes a lot of cycles that would be better spent on addressing the basic interoperability issues facing RTCweb.

So I think the MTI audio codecs already agreed is enough to ensure interoperability.

Andrew

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of Harald Alvestrand
Sent: Thursday, December 27, 2012 11:33 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio Codecs

Speaking as an individual:

I am putting my name on 2), because I believe RECOMMENDED is too strong for secondary codecs.

On 12/20/2012 09:29 AM, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
> WG,
>
> As an outcome of the Vancouver IETF meeting codec discussions we did 
> promise to run a call for consensus regarding if the WG was interested 
> in specifying a small set of recommended audio codecs. We are sorry 
> this has been delayed until now.
>
> The question for the call of consensus is between two options.
>
> 1) Run a process in the WG to select and specify a small set of 
> audio/speech codecs that would be RECOMMNEDED to implement by a WebRTC 
> end-points
>
> 2) Do nothing and let the already specified Mandatory to Implement 
> Audio codecs be the only audio codecs mentioned in the WebRTC specification.
>
> Please indicate your position by January 16th 2013.
>
> Regards
>
> Magnus Westerlund
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Ericsson AB                | Phone  [phone]
> Färögatan 6                | Mobile [phone]
> SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto: [e-mail]
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb

---------------------------------------------------------------------
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.