Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec

Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com> Wed, 10 December 2014 08:47 UTC

Return-Path: <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.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 076E61A88EB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:47:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 Bduzzqz080F8 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:47:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-wi0-x22c.google.com (mail-wi0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::22c]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5F0901A88A8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:47:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-wi0-f172.google.com with SMTP id n3so10428254wiv.5 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:47:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=98O/F4TB4qaLh+YYpy6UOSgePQCysDXf4vDcJfDV4vw=; b=sN/t0kzpvh6QXZQ8CY8JYDSPq+g95MgtLIhjhGs3cib79BLUiay37Bo0HXtHM7yP7W vUwz14sStdc028kjZvrBJiod0N1vp82QmDcJi2vdDxgSmd2lrerMI9nOYjx2d4UQXIZg 1wFh/BeHKmYE8tBvrbAPVk/MccuqRWBkutx+7Hm8prCRy97i9VJ6oKiat4FCVmt6LpIV w4oAGxxoBDYNAGsT6LPUiN0GSUP4RvOl0ehUZenb+FMy1DZ1/c9DEx7u3x4YOBqBYLhb gtkl8pUD73+J4wskpMv4J3QnH/b9kd04Dsh5jIqMA5f9SD8xyggdtRZAfrxrUTQ/h3O1 lwwg==
X-Received: by 10.194.62.163 with SMTP id z3mr4667191wjr.74.1418201246184; Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:47:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.0.194] ([95.61.111.78]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dm10sm17002781wib.18.2014.12.10.00.47.24 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Dec 2014 00:47:25 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5488089B.5020303@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 09:47:23 +0100
From: Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <E3FA0C72-48C5-465E-AE15-EB19D8D563A7@ieca.com> <CAPF_GTaJwaS9+9uSSGTC1+RqKb=uF8UQxsP4u5jPJiRi=88-Nw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOW+2dvGH6jEp072GxfQwZ=O_QaxZpTrq3bgd2A-gOMj2PL9ZQ@mail.gmail.com> <CABcZeBPw+JoXmHM_nH=ZF6zWfMpw_V1MLZU=hD6kac8qv_Z5eQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAOW+2dsv9W9_x+RroLdsAKyhNAFGGdCTm9P3BMf1_L0XzB8UBQ@mail.gmail.com> <A4330364-297D-422F-90F7-1E2B98F732FB@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <A4330364-297D-422F-90F7-1E2B98F732FB@phonefromhere.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/gbMc6R8-Lx_7-n97RDO-sLUcdfw
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] confirming sense of the room: mti codec
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: Wed, 10 Dec 2014 08:47:38 -0000

On 10/12/2014 9:16, Tim Panton wrote:
>
>> On 10 Dec 2014, at 01:03, Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> My bad.
>>
>> New question:  How can an endpoint that implements video but none of the MTI codecs be construed as "WebRTC Compatible”?
> At the risk of falling down the semantic trap you set, it could be pushing an experimental webGL based codec over the data channel.
> or an art installation. It might implement encode only of one of the MTIs - one way survelliance - or even encode on VP8 and decode on h264
> because of some whacky licensing shenanigans.
>
> It is very easy to see these standards in terms of classic video calls, while forgetting that the web is a wild and exciting place full of
> strange and unexpected surprises.

Or you could implement a video chat application for multiple users and 
use only VP9. Check Google hangouts in a couple of months for that..

Best regards
  Sergio