IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-10.txt> (WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing Requirements) to Proposed Standard

Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com> Tue, 01 March 2016 18:31 UTC

Return-Path: <roman@telurix.com>
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 659F61B32B6 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:31:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 JvEDU8L604Dm for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:31:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-x236.google.com (mail-io0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 613D61B30F7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:31:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-x236.google.com with SMTP id l127so232431369iof.3 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 10:31:37 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=telurix-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc; bh=/LKcmiSq7uFftC7aAwNoGRk5Y0cJeGGfN/6bvOX6yds=; b=RZ7thzpFxqpIrZar7H6crFleccofsrBN11C3Cv58bOUPPuJCxF4V/yzSpzZcTnFl3M KGFNZQRkFgc4q7T19wcbq9zRZ0a/S23gHIfRsrmy2+bdRUCh9OfYulvA3FSMD4XFRQo/ GN/yEblh4XhGx9qGlGiiROQcssxEnPPU2oAumWaGduzlNU5iIwOOITKiJDlD8IgICGwq OVQh1s6Xjk3et0UHyhRAYl5StTPNlgBqGhOO2KW5SUua7qDTuiDTmaXLfXJlZzwL6XNn ANDg02Azc0LdwFlLaIxF0LHNDAsfJnlCsqB4Ryv0CAY7HIjziv1C6WvH/BBmx4OBbfix MA5Q==
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:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=/LKcmiSq7uFftC7aAwNoGRk5Y0cJeGGfN/6bvOX6yds=; b=Q9p1B/wEyH0RQOAYt9g4KMSVLH6CU+js92Fzv5k2GufUiZ4WnOj4HvvRfzLDDodro0 CqkHgAcz0D9Jcbqmses2xGZFGvAR8d7V638hcFVz4JI7829bYqZ20+GS+K5UxJNrcIdv MvXxrzqAwBvjnDyAyHZ0fUwUOPC5WmxXdll41vdYy4bAkP0VhMqEKYgEHQARvLAr03lN 4velbrjM2Zpa+n3DgsYbsoum7OFI3ab38pK1rBSchHEEmBibgxoTrz76x1sT1wI1KBlu mNgnofj+M7/DIwYJjBid5iDQIDIL7WzbJMsf2oIeDYNZNRcqQeXLPiJI1T2Xf9n1/j8L tOrA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOSk6qECnZV1K22rXg1htuncvfaiLFzt3DdjkhmADvEiKqRZ8aLZk2q7RIxEYUNuZA==
X-Received: by 10.107.136.194 with SMTP id s63mr28874311ioi.88.1456857096785; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 10:31:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-io0-f176.google.com (mail-io0-f176.google.com. [209.85.223.176]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z18sm158136igp.20.2016.03.01.10.31.34 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 01 Mar 2016 10:31:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-io0-f176.google.com with SMTP id g203so232481263iof.2 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 10:31:34 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.107.157.70 with SMTP id g67mr23889483ioe.38.1456857094400; Tue, 01 Mar 2016 10:31:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.36.105.77 with HTTP; Tue, 1 Mar 2016 10:31:34 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <SN1PR0301MB1551D1333297368D66B150ACB2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
References: <20160224213121.376.85278.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAD5OKxuQT2hdDHWdVxHGEcC3PuMMDjpaBpfAygRBa7-kdv79Rg@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB15519E82B0384EF6EC348B72B2B80@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <56D1A080.7050901@alvestrand.no> <SN1PR0301MB1551A6D49F18116A70A107CCB2B80@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CA+9kkMB5pye7-tXgBFrzk+F-3dApY-4pEX_1Foob-ug6dmztXg@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB1551506B16DC14D555E98AD4B2BA0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CA+9kkMAxR0_HzpqM3aQwVBX51G87+ZnYpd7AEwHsw0unpcPV1w@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB1551C791B62BC7311DB3897CB2BA0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAD5OKxtonFCucoou8Es+0RCuBx-oa++w5__=EBXT7kVToksE4A@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB155111CC2AAC4D3B0962B3E6B2BA0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CA+9kkMAk_jPu5Pd1kU6aEh2au5x-tE4v+c9zU5nzx64t47DUmQ@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB15518F98FD31A3BAE6505079B2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <56D55FE9.60408@alvestrand.no> <SN1PR0301MB15512FBBCA5186B4829FEFA8B2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B374B9596@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <SN1PR0301MB1551D1333297368D66B150ACB2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2016 13:31:34 -0500
X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvf+HBknqxXXY=_t9sCFGUFMUczu6k5DkMS-M8aV0Sjxw@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CAD5OKxvf+HBknqxXXY=_t9sCFGUFMUczu6k5DkMS-M8aV0Sjxw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
To: "Asveren, Tolga" <tasveren@sonusnet.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1140b47299be6f052d00f99f"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/asmve8FOorIZs4lOAAfjijYiafw>
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-10.txt> (WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing Requirements) to Proposed Standard
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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, 01 Mar 2016 18:31:38 -0000

On Tue, Mar 1, 2016 at 6:27 AM, Asveren, Tolga <tasveren@sonusnet.com>
wrote:

>  And 40ms is definitely too low of a value, I am aware of VoIP systems
> where lower values are used (but I definitely think that no enforced limit
> is the right thing to do rather than merely decreasing min).
>

I assume you meant 40 ms is too high of the value. If you have an example
of an application (except testing apps) which is using a lower value,
please provide it to the list.
_____________
Roman Shpount

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email