[rtcweb] Video codec selection: Dropping options

<Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com> Thu, 28 November 2013 08:30 UTC

Return-Path: <Markus.Isomaki@nokia.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 4604A1AD6D1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 00:30:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.202
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.202 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-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 IJKKGQmcOPL8 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 00:30:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mgw-sa02.nokia.com (smtp.nokia.com [147.243.1.48]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1D931AD84D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 00:30:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.mgd.nokia.com ([65.54.30.23]) by mgw-sa02.nokia.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.2.2) with ESMTP id rAS8MxIO029924 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=OK) for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 10:23:00 +0200
Received: from 008-AM1MPN1-041.mgdnok.nokia.com ([169.254.1.177]) by 008-AM1MMR1-007.mgdnok.nokia.com ([65.54.30.23]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.002; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:22:59 +0000
From: <Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com>
To: <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: Video codec selection: Dropping options
Thread-Index: Ac7sDy85pPAEQkadSWWa4C8bEEktTw==
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:22:59 +0000
Message-ID: <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7620A13AE73@008-AM1MPN1-041.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-tituslabs-classifications-30: TLPropertyRoot=Nokia; Confidentiality=Nokia Internal Use Only;
x-titus-version: 3.5.9.3
x-headerinfofordlp:
x-tituslabs-classificationhash-30: 7dNHFIWeM+LwDx2hQ+BXFjVJPDrlSQ9nKjS5OO31/C4SomrglQ4UHSvHQodIw3BM0cJV5E1qkwTVAQXGAYYX6Z1hF/UVFHUyQneDTOhPrMeiEZHt+eDzE9guu2n44KBwIs7o1Blm6ko6zTFjeEO1Olt8mRUYHzXUpfjQSPzg/9yL9qB+PTlcNR8M2WT0Xk4Qyr4sEzZm/JjFI0Ef76r732V0KwyAqXzA0woDGgQHj9I=
x-originating-ip: [10.163.22.170]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Nokia-AV: Clean
Subject: [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: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 08:30:23 -0000

Hi,

I'm not much in favor of the voting, but if we do it:

Based on the consensus call we already held in Vancouver, I would propose to drop from the list in [1] any options that make exclusively VP8 mandatory to implement or exclusively H.264 mandatory to implement. I think we have already established that much, and including those options in any vote seems wrong. 

In practice I'm talking about these four options:
1. All entities MUST support H.264
2. All entities MUST support VP8
3. All entities MUST support both H.264 and VP8 
4. Browsers MUST support both H.264 and VP8, other entities MUST support at least one of H.264 and VP8

What the WG should focus on is to see if there is a consensus on any of the so called "fallback" options vs. no MTI. I think these are all valid as such as a "fallback":

5. All entities MUST support at least one of H.264 and VP8
6. All entities MUST support H.261
7. There is no MTI video codec
8. 5+6, i.e. All entities MUST support H.261 and all entities MUST support at least one of H.264 and VP8
9. All entities MUST support Theora
10. All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.261}
11. All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.263}
12. All entities MUST support decoding using both H.264 and VP8, and MUST support encoding using at least one of H.264 or VP8
13. All entities MUST support H.263
14. All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264 CBP, Theora}
15. All entities MUST support decoding using Theora.

I think it would be problematic even if one of options 1-4 came out as a winner from a voting procedure, since it would force a large part of the community to implement something they have valid reasons to avoid. Some of the options 5-15 may have issues as well, but at least a consensus call among them would still be in order, since we haven't really had it so far. And presumably the issues and polarization are "smaller" than with the VP8 vs. H.264 argument. 

Regards,
	Markus

[1] http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/rtcweb/trac/wiki/WikiStart