Re: [rtcweb] MTI Video Codec: a novel proposal

Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> Tue, 11 November 2014 06:48 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard.aboba@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 67E311A88E6 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:48:31 -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 KAUTHgbSlq3g for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:48:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pd0-x232.google.com (mail-pd0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::232]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 073841A6EE8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:48:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pd0-f178.google.com with SMTP id fp1so9559241pdb.9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:48:28 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=references:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:cc:from:subject:date:to; bh=luCizQ1H2p5DeD4xkmxbbwPw43DHQfcoGFmcurg3cc4=; b=VKoIY1MbEskN+IHru8WLMwC1/yaO+mEyRAVU+zBctXujlqmlKXtS0GgmHJXdDeGlwp BAIFNrUd1YKcDCC51oXm1Zf4Qy6dgWjciwyWyUO+L+1AVV64pzuUgAPRQGqkXy5AuiNj EAIPsMjNmP5LvIeulezJ1DAgO9xVKaevN2nRHcTLFL2fN8UNOIw8aqLMFGwt9Dh0CqpS 0id0vkipHk7nkaK7fD4jJru6UFCElwjf8SoheVDLKNTtRT4dD2Uc6+qMieN/WrceFpCQ pdlf2Zt9WCWhBYxhxWzevyDXKmg4DraAqlXkgGw70E77rGmartBjqLv91F+dNx4AMkBp uUGA==
X-Received: by 10.70.35.1 with SMTP id d1mr9498146pdj.141.1415688508316; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:48:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.219.121.254] ([166.170.51.122]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id yw3sm18244183pbc.88.2014.11.10.22.48.26 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 10 Nov 2014 22:48:26 -0800 (PST)
References: <54601E19.8080203@nostrum.com> <176316D6-D685-45F4-AA8E-A4F07521CAE4@matthew.at> <1D5CFB04-2CCB-424C-A364-1CAA05E84D12@apple.com> <20141111011054.GR8092@hex.shelbyville.oz> <E18B79D1-D8C8-4A17-A2F0-93BDAAFED698@apple.com> <BE15C090-239F-45BC-8747-501AC86653B2@gmail.com> <5461A019.6030108@alvestrand.no>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <5461A019.6030108@alvestrand.no>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <1A6093A8-A7E9-4760-B790-CC767CAA2116@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPhone Mail (12B411)
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 20:48:23 -1000
To: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/hxEYHYE1DJbd_fypZoOR1sohLHo
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] MTI Video Codec: a novel proposal
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: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:48:31 -0000




> On Nov 10, 2014, at 7:35 PM, Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>; wrote:
> 
>> On 11/10/2014 07:19 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
>> I do not get it either. It seems like mobile apps (which count as devices) using a WEBRTC stack now have to include both codecs regardless of whether they need them. Do we really think app developers will pay attention? Why should they?
> 
> Because they can then depend on interoperability with other non-browsers?

[BA] Isn't the non-browser in question the mobile app the developer wrote? Most of these apps only need to interop with the app on another platform, a browser app and/or their own service. So they typically only need one codec or the other not both.