Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 30 August 2012 05:49 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
X-Original-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3605011E8106 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 22:49:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.149
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.149 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.450, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ruWhuIEDldas for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 22:49:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AAC5311E8105 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 29 Aug 2012 22:49:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C01F39E207; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 07:49:01 +0200 (CEST)
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 QMqXqeSTvars; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 07:48:57 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.168.11.107] (c-56fbe555.03-217-73746f1.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se [85.229.251.86]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4919939E04C; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 07:48:57 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <503EFECA.1070407@alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 07:48:58 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120714 Thunderbird/14.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Richard Shockey <richard@shockey.us>
References: <9E2843EA-EBB9-40B3-898C-6B5216FAE7A5@cisco.com> <503DED41.7080906@alvestrand.no> <014401cd8633$efd76fe0$cf864fa0$@us>
In-Reply-To: <014401cd8633$efd76fe0$cf864fa0$@us>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs
X-BeenThere: rtcweb@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 05:49:38 -0000

On 08/30/2012 12:16 AM, Richard Shockey wrote:
> Fine works for me but please 722 WB for SHOULD. Of course none of this will
> be of any significance if you can't agree on a reasonable offer/answer model
> that interoperates with public SIP networks ( previously called the PSTN )
We've already got people writing Javascript that interworks with 
Asterisk, so I don't think this is going to be a problem (unless someone 
decides to start over again).

>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:rtcweb-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Harald Alvestrand
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:22 AM
> To: rtcweb@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs
>
> Since the number of people stating their opinion has been large, I'll just
> reiterate the opinion I had (and hummed for) in Vancouver:
>
> Opus and G.711 should be mandatory to implement for RTCWEB.
>
> Since the question of whether there's any value to making the decision now
> has been raised:
>
> The first interoperable products implementing RTCWEB are shipping within a
> very short timeframe. Those first implementations will shape the market for
> what's actually used in practice.
> In order to allow applications requiring high quality sound to be among the
> first ones developed, those first products need to include a common choice
> of a high quality codec.
>
> Having the RTCWEB WG state as a decision that this codec should be Opus
> helps in making sure these products ship with Opus.
>
> The time to decide is now.
>
>                     Harald
>
> [Note - the same logic applies to video codecs, but I've accepted that it's
> impossible to make a consensus decision at this time on that issue.
> We'll just live with the consequences of that.]
>
> On 08/16/2012 07:15 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy) wrote:
>> At the last meeting we took a hum on selecting Opus and G.711 as the
> mediatory to implement audio codecs. If there is any new opinions please
> send them to the list by August 30th, after which the chairs will make a
> determination of consensus.
>> Thanks,
>> Cullen
>>
>> Please note that the following IPR disclosure have been made on these
>> codecs. They can be found at
>>
>> http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/
>>
>>
>> 2010-11-07	
>> . ID # 1445
>> "Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-00 and draft-ietf-codec-description-00 (1)"
>> 2010-11-07	
>> . ID # 1446
>> "Xiph.Org Foundation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-00"
>> 2010-11-12	
>> . ID # 1447
>> "Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-00 and draft-ietf-codec-description-00 (2)"
>> 2011-03-23	
>> . ID # 1520
>> "Qualcomm Incorporated's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
>> 2011-03-27	
>> . ID # 1524
>> "Xiph.Org Foundation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
>> 2011-03-29	
>> . ID # 1526
>> "Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
>> 2011-03-29	
>> . ID # 1525
>> "Skype Limited's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
>> 2011-07-23	
>> . ID # 1602
>> "Skype Limited's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-codec-opus-07"
>> 2012-01-25	
>> . ID # 1670
>> "Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-10"
>> 2012-03-12	
>> . ID # 1712
>> "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-11 (1)"
>> 2012-04-02	
>> . ID # 1741
>> "Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to
> draft-ietf-codec-opus-11 (2)"
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
>> rtcweb@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> rtcweb@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
>