Re: [rtcweb] Some thoughts on optional audio codecs

Enrico Marocco <enrico.marocco@telecomitalia.it> Wed, 17 July 2013 07:44 UTC

Return-Path: <enrico.marocco@telecomitalia.it>
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 5DC2221F88DB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 00:44:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.619
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.619 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.100, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_IT=0.635, HOST_EQ_IT=1.245, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 969U3RNcKKgQ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 00:44:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from GRFEDG702RM001.telecomitalia.it (grfedg702rm001.telecomitalia.it [217.169.121.21]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB93221F8C3E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 00:44:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from grfhub702rm001.griffon.local (10.19.3.9) by GRFEDG702RM001.telecomitalia.it (10.173.88.21) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.297.1; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:44:44 +0200
Received: from MacLab.local (163.162.180.246) by smtp.telecomitalia.it (10.19.9.235) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.297.1; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:44:44 +0200
Message-ID: <51E64B6B.8080407@telecomitalia.it>
Date: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 09:44:43 +0200
From: Enrico Marocco <enrico.marocco@telecomitalia.it>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
References: <BBE9739C2C302046BD34B42713A1E2A22DEE3029@ESESSMB105.ericsson.se> <51E55A2E.8090303@telecomitalia.it> <51E5A7E4.5020408@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <51E5A7E4.5020408@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; boundary="------------ms070901030702060503060000"
X-TI-Disclaimer: Disclaimer1
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Some thoughts on optional 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: Wed, 17 Jul 2013 07:44:54 -0000

On 7/16/13 10:07 PM, Adam Roach wrote:
>>> In that draft, I would prefer something more in line with:
>>>
>>> "If other suitable audio codecs are available to the browser to use,
>>> it is recommended that they are also included in the offer in order
>>> to maximize the possibility to establish the session without the need
>>> for audio transcoding".
>> Yes, in fact this is happening already:
>> https://hacks.mozilla.org/2013/01/firefox-development-highlights-h-264-mp3-support-on-windows-scoped-stylesheets-more/
> 
> You have misread that article. What that article says is that Mozilla is 
> adding select platform-supplied codecs to Firefox for non-WebRTC uses.

Sure, didn't mean to imply that it is happening for WebRTC.

> Our implementation of audio codecs for WebRTC continues to support PCMU, 
> PCMA, Opus, and nothing else; our implementation use VP8 exclusively for 
> video.

And that's pretty visible also from the outside. What's not visible is
whether at some point in time Mozilla will consider taking advantage of
OS/platform-provided encoding/decoding capabilities also for WebRTC. One
may be led to assume yes, as you're doing it for static content already.

But maybe different conditions apply here, and I don't expect them to be
discussed on this mailing list (even if it would be very, very
interesting!).

Enrico