IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio Codecs

"Timothy B. Terriberry" <tterriberry@mozilla.com> Fri, 21 December 2012 04:21 UTC

Return-Path: <tterriberry@mozilla.com>
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 7C59C21E803F for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 20:21:26 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.677
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.677 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_ORG=0.611, HOST_MISMATCH_COM=0.311, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cb1Hh+xZsuvd for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 20:21:24 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp.mozilla.org (mx1.corp.phx1.mozilla.com [63.245.216.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0749A21F8964 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 20:21:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.11.10] (pool-71-114-8-24.washdc.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.114.8.24]) (Authenticated sender: tterriberry@mozilla.com) by mx1.mail.corp.phx1.mozilla.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CC166F2140 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 20 Dec 2012 20:21:20 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <50D3E3BF.7070609@mozilla.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 20:21:19 -0800
From: "Timothy B. Terriberry" <tterriberry@mozilla.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120625 SeaMonkey/2.10.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <50D2CC6A.4090500@ericsson.com> <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7623356EF@008-AM1MPN1-041.mgdnok.nokia.com>
In-Reply-To: <E44893DD4E290745BB608EB23FDDB7623356EF@008-AM1MPN1-041.mgdnok.nokia.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended 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: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 04:21:26 -0000

Markus.Isomaki@nokia.com wrote:
> My proposal would be to recommend AMR, and perhaps AMR-WB. The rationale is

I don't think we should list a set of RECOMMENDED codecs. If we were 
talking just G.722, iLBC, etc., I might be persuaded. But this is a 2119 
RECOMMENDED, which is a bit stronger than "Gee, it would be nice," and 
given the aforementioned IPR situation, Mozilla is not likely to be 
deploying any of the AMR family anytime soon.

If the goal is interoperability with deployed systems, you're going to 
implement what you need to implement to achieve that, and nothing we 
write down in an RFC will change what that needs to be.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email