Re: [rtcweb] H.261 - taking a longer view of things

cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> Mon, 25 November 2013 01:51 UTC

Return-Path: <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
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 38C241AE1BF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:51:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 hJOr11E-zWkx for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:51:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ie0-f175.google.com (mail-ie0-f175.google.com [209.85.223.175]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D02DD1A1F3D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:51:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ie0-f175.google.com with SMTP id x13so5699144ief.6 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:51:22 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=U3YhbVkyyaRmOmLbvLIfvI4D9dsdgU4hf5ud/qnks94=; b=QmfMl2E7r+YB43AUwV8RXzqWqmzHDU/sD4XUP4yzKm2LADBoP+/IOmy+JWMjkI7NGG RewfEJoT8mfUIBK/QYAbxBLrBb5Is7TQP0IswBfOWhAEc5P0XnaWsMeFRvXdw9bfFemK B6bYXqbx5QyFs9sAOI90SMkpzCczDS8b9Em/elbq+ciNekm3/YF+g76qXGADsmYKGwYR gXJTuC+1QKSOgMhBE0E32YN28jEk4+drSVLVJPc4HBGoOOVCEgT48gG72bH9fAu1aOV/ JBlQCaKWrMfO63M1bkK5pGoJj0PKHvSwroGvUHrc/PACS30qJa65QL2UElu3jseeU4mC TvTQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlJO4ShtOuAVlqh6tqXJ7KeW7RXSed9DpEOziSuV/uzYC+zBPtct2cPpGA5MHdm+eTR08LB
X-Received: by 10.50.16.45 with SMTP id c13mr10795244igd.55.1385344282338; Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:51:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (206-248-171-209.dsl.teksavvy.com. [206.248.171.209]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id i11sm23111187igh.0.2013.11.24.17.51.20 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sun, 24 Nov 2013 17:51:21 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5292ACF8.4050704@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2013 20:50:48 -0500
From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E66DE@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528FAAA8.8060807@googlemail.com> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E66FE@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528FC497.2080804@googlemail.com> <A3A17126-2DA7-4D41-A2CE-8580BC2FEAE4@apple.com> <528FEC5A.8060701@librevideo.org> <7C4C4F47-1F9B-4A69-AE68-122DE394E203@apple.com> <52911AC5.3090408@gmail.com> <20131124013400.GI3245@audi.shelbyville.oz> <52925239.1000807@bbs.darktech.org> <20131125004454.GL3245@audi.shelbyville.oz>
In-Reply-To: <20131125004454.GL3245@audi.shelbyville.oz>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] H.261 - taking a longer view of things
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, 25 Nov 2013 01:51:24 -0000

On 24/11/2013 7:44 PM, Ron wrote:
> We're not defining a widget library, or toy scripting language here, 
> where it's ok to tell everybody their old stuff won't work anymore 
> next year and they'll need to completely rewrite it. We're proposing a 
> new internet standard. If people see that it has no enduring or 
> expected lifetime, they're just going to ignore it and we're 
> completely wasting our time.

i think you are being a bit over-dramatic. Say one day we discover that 
codec X is strictly-better than H.261 and decide to replace it. We would 
add X as MTI, alongside H.261 as part of WebRTC 2.0 and announce that 
H.261 is deprecated. Fast forward a few years, and WebRTC 3.0 is about 
to roll out. If we find that 95% [1] of users are using WebRTC 2.0 and 
higher then we can safely remove H.261 as MTI from version 3.0. I see no 
benefit in supporting deprecated features forever, nor do I see how 
removing them will cause WebRTC to fail.

Take a look at http://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html 
... Will Android lose value if they drop support for version 2.2? I 
think not. It has 1.7% market share in spite of the fact it was released 
3.5 years ago.

Mobile platforms and auto-updating applications make it easier and 
easier to drop deprecated features.

[1] 95% is an arbitrary figure, you can use 99% if it makes you happier.

Gili