Re: [rtcweb] Video codec selection: Dropping options

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Fri, 29 November 2013 09:31 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 B7D0D1A1F55 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 01:31:37 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-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 OUNGDArO7JrF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 01:31:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2:213:72ff:fe0b:80d8]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B0421ACB4E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 01:31:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1D1339E132 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:31:35 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PSF4AgnBshtN for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:31:35 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [192.168.1.17] (unknown [188.113.88.47]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 067BE39E091 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:31:35 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <52985F2F.6030507@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 10:32:31 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7620A13AE73@008-AM1MPN1-041.mgdnok.nokia.com> <CAGgHUiQLXSzU+AvCcvDa383DA=OGd9-NTedfFOAVGt+OmyKwwg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGgHUiQLXSzU+AvCcvDa383DA=OGd9-NTedfFOAVGt+OmyKwwg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Video codec selection: Dropping options
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: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 09:31:37 -0000

On 11/28/2013 11:20 AM, Leon Geyser wrote:
> I also agree on this.
>
> Also 5 does not mean anything.
> I don't like my own option of 8 that much, because 10 is much better :)
> 11 and 13 are scary options.
> If 12 is possible it would be a great option. Do most patents only 
> apply for encoding?
>
One curiosity of the way standards for codecs are produced is that only 
the decoder is normative. So the only patents licensors are required to 
disclose in the standards process are patents on the decoder.

In theory, I think they could also be required to disclose patents that 
apply to any possible encoder for which this is a valid decoder, but I 
think this is unlikely to happen in practice (because most such patents 
would also describe the decoding part). But that is uncomfortably close 
to speculation, so don't trust me on that.