Re: [rtcweb] H.261

Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com> Mon, 02 December 2013 19:56 UTC

Return-Path: <adam@nostrum.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 C3A191AD8D5 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:56:24 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.036
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.036 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311] autolearn=no
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 4YNuGGuzyL42 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:56:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66D2E1AD845 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:56:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orochi.roach.at (99-152-145-110.lightspeed.dllstx.sbcglobal.net [99.152.145.110]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id rB2JuB0j069244 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 2 Dec 2013 13:56:11 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from adam@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <529CE5D6.2060209@nostrum.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 13:56:06 -0600
From: Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)" <mzanaty@cisco.com>, Ron <ron@debian.org>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
References: <528F9DAD.3030300@googlemail.com> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E66DE@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528FAAA8.8060807@googlemail.com> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E66FE@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528FB79F.8090405@gmail.com> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA9E670F@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <528FBD13.5040801@gmail.com> <528FD429.7090002@nostrum.com> <528FDE5E.5080301@librevideo.org> <CE523335-0146-4FA5-A735-1EB4A8B3F1EF@apple.com> <20131123003548.GD3245@audi.shelbyville.oz> <529006BB.609@nostrum.com> <CEB58817.1EB8B%mzanaty@cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <CEB58817.1EB8B%mzanaty@cisco.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 99.152.145.110 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] H.261
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: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 19:56:24 -0000

On 11/22/13 22:45, Mo Zanaty (mzanaty) wrote:
> All major distros including Debian already include x264, ffmpeg, etc.
> http://packages.debian.org/wheezy/x264

Wait, what?

Why would Linux distros care whether they can include the Cisco library 
when they already distribute an H.264 encoder library? Is there some 
reason they would *need* two different encoders?

/a