Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process

Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca> Thu, 21 November 2013 22:38 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@iii.ca>
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 1BA0D1AE3B4 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:38:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, GUARANTEED_100_PERCENT=2.699, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] 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 FS2IcNruFVZ0 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:38:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 573721AE3AC for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:37:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sjc-vpn2-1025.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.239.235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4269350A84; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 17:37:36 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Cullen Jennings <fluffy@iii.ca>
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ7v-3ruj91wd=1_TUevapamLxNJ93Ukd=VU+Gq7Q19YTvc+A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:38:12 -0800
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E04C49C8-3D3D-4805-9D04-A017C2AD8E46@iii.ca>
References: <528E69E2.9020208@librevideo.org> <7949EED078736C4881C92F656DC6F6C130EA8AD7E0@ausmsex00.austin.kmvtechnologies.com> <CAOJ7v-151K2UoeMOhY-UUDzZwE=89qzbAQdrhQXYb72W+ZxQOw@mail.gmail.com> <3249225E-6709-4022-88CF-75020C1A4CEC@iii.ca> <CAOJ7v-3ruj91wd=1_TUevapamLxNJ93Ukd=VU+Gq7Q19YTvc+A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process
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: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 22:38:11 -0000

On Nov 21, 2013, at 2:31 PM, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>; wrote:

> Put another way, if the alleged IPR issues associated with either H.264 or VP8 disappeared overnight, this discussion would be instantly over.

Justin, I don't think everyone agrees with you on this. If VP8 was magically 100% guaranteed to be free of all patents tomorrow, there would still be a large block of people arguing for H.264.  I'm not trying to say there is consensus on this topic, one way or the other, just that not everyone agrees with that.