IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Consensus vs. Voting (was Re: Call for Consensus Regarding Selecting Recommended Audio Codecs)

Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com> Mon, 14 January 2013 15:54 UTC

Return-Path: <tim@phonefromhere.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 B431621F894C for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 07:54:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.442
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.442 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.158, BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 nTvvV47BRZ77 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 07:54:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp003.apm-internet.net (smtp003.apm-internet.net [85.119.248.52]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB06E21F8919 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 07:54:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail 59511 invoked from network); 14 Jan 2013 15:54:56 -0000
X-AV-Scan: clean
Received: from unknown (HELO zimbra003.verygoodemail.com) (85.119.248.218) by smtp003.apm-internet.net with SMTP; 14 Jan 2013 15:54:56 -0000
Received: from [192.67.4.33] (unknown [192.67.4.33]) by zimbra003.verygoodemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 69D9A18A0B07; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:54:56 +0000 (GMT)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1283)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
From: Tim Panton <tim@phonefromhere.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD5OKxtsWMfAV=K4sM+zLXoyVCgihwujH2gG9ziA5GuEtsU0sQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:54:54 +0000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2327AE82-FC1E-4D09-B6B4-E87F01BD3527@phonefromhere.com>
References: <50D2CC6A.4090500@ericsson.com> <6515_1357907583_50F0067F_6515_1738_1_2842AD9A45C83B44B57635FD4831E60A0747CC@PEXCVZYM14.corporate.adroot.infra.ftgroup> <BLU0-SMTP880A602A311CE05C9DC39FD0290@phx.gbl> <A26C56D5-C501-4823-8099-62AF7910B8A4@ntt-at.com> <580BEA5E3B99744AB1F5BFF5E9A3C67D16813E56EC@HE111648.emea1.cds.t-internal.com> <50F41D97.1030508@nostrum.com> <CAD5OKxtsWMfAV=K4sM+zLXoyVCgihwujH2gG9ziA5GuEtsU0sQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Roman Shpount <roman@telurix.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1283)
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Consensus vs. Voting (was Re: 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: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 15:54:59 -0000

On 14 Jan 2013, at 15:21, Roman Shpount wrote:

> I know that I would sound like I am repeating myself, but my initial argument was that in order to interoperate with majority of legacy HD Audio deployments without transcoding WebRTC implementations SHOULD support G.722. The main argument that I heard against this was that interoperability with legacy is not a justification enough for a SHOULD. 


It's slightly more nuanced than that. More like:  "the additional ease of interoperability with legacy is not a justification enough for a SHOULD" .

Even without 722 we can interop with legacy HD , just not as easily - is that added convenience enough to justify the SHOULD? Conversely 
having 722 doesn't solve the whole interop problem, which further reduces the 'win' from adding it.


Tim.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email