Re: [rtcweb] Video codecs: Clear positions....

tim panton <tim@phonefromhere.com> Tue, 09 December 2014 17:46 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@phonefromhere.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 543A01A8A15 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 09:46:35 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.9
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 yrFaEXSsW4cZ for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 09:46:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp002.apm-internet.net (smtp002-out2.apm-internet.net [85.119.248.225]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 452F41A8A0E for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 09:46:31 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 19968 invoked from network); 9 Dec 2014 17:46:29 -0000
X-AV-Scan: clean
X-APM-Authkey: 83769 12874
Received: from unknown (HELO zimbra003.verygoodemail.com) (85.119.248.218) by smtp002.apm-internet.net with SMTP; 9 Dec 2014 17:46:29 -0000
Received: from zimbra003.verygoodemail.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra003.verygoodemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 36E7A18A0FEE; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 17:46:26 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from [192.168.157.34] (unknown [192.67.4.66]) by zimbra003.verygoodemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2545318A0CC3; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 17:46:26 +0000 (GMT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 8.1 \(1993\))
From: tim panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <5487331F.8050404@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 17:46:26 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <ADFB0D72-78B1-40F8-9767-887B96B7B2E9@phonefromhere.com>
References: <5486C48D.8040602@alvestrand.no> <F092E8C6-380C-4B20-B71F-449162617BC5@apple.com> <5487331F.8050404@bbs.darktech.org>
To: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1993)
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/iwxSuRc--RmAoOisQdXbhBmfywo
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Video codecs: Clear positions....
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, 09 Dec 2014 17:46:35 -0000

> On 9 Dec 2014, at 17:36, cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
> 
> On 09/12/2014 12:32 PM, David Singer wrote:
>>> On Dec 9, 2014, at 1:44 , Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I note that the "confirming sense of the room" thread has gotten a lot
>>> of messages that are not declaring a position on the question.
>>> 
>>> I also note that from the messages on the thread, I can't figure out if
>>> Keith Drage, Gili, Monty Montgomery or Peter Saint-Andre have taken a
>>> position (I could guess, but I don't want to - besides, they might not
>>> want to take a position, which is perfectly OK).
>>> 
>>> It would be nice for me as a reader if people could:
>>> 
>>> - state their position on the "confirming sense of the room" thread
>>> - change the subject line when they want to say anything else
>>> 
>>> That's my preference - of course, people who have "mute thread" in their
>>> email readers might want the whole discussion to stay on thread, and
>>> will hate me for the last suggestion....
>>> 
>>> Harald
>> Thanks, Harald, that would help.
>> 
>> I would also like to know from those confirming the sense of the room, whether THEY THEMSELVES intend to implement both codecs, or whether they conveniently think they don’t need to, and it’s just a problem for other people to handle.
>> 
>> Honestly, a +1 for “those other people should do it” is meaningless.
> 
> That's a fair point. I'm guessing the vast majority of people answering on the mailing list only plan to implement one codec because they are non-browser implementors.

I think you may find quite a few people here building APIs toolkits, libraries and gateways who will want the webRTC-compatible
sticker on their product or project, so will probably end up offering a free version with VP8 support and a crazy expensive one
that does both codecs.

T.