Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI
cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> Tue, 05 November 2013 18:04 UTC
Return-Path: <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
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 92C6A21E80BA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 10:04:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.571
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.571 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.972, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id SuB5DtPEw6O4 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 10:03:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ie0-f169.google.com (mail-ie0-f169.google.com [209.85.223.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDA5E11E815C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Nov 2013 10:02:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ie0-f169.google.com with SMTP id ar20so15965588iec.0 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 10:02:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=4xviesyuasAe/YvUqEwJ94NICs/VJBKmuJJd+W2sYlg=; b=e2K+lMQTJ5Z1nrHdF9gdq0zLVPG6qMdGwr1TnvFlyjYI24D1DEOF4B+huSlJ0BDB/N LWYy2aJOKnwwACmikta78Fz5rItysjn2SoWk1T4MCCOe6k8KuhCoIo9CvrPTkzwNj2kB 4wujuwL0EPztAWb7Z2lAR1EC5BBAgFDiNOxaIpM2Udc3n91fVK4ZM5nThY+IUHC/JIHg ieWCB26sU74o1NrK9S4vLjZo0VSLChuQIMIk8XwrjPXdJ9oIcws/i7MsufU6KUMMu4pm I68/4lySYC6H3dRkUNhosN18joAfLJiZvVJ8fDplN275yqVlVKBnRXb2vlQISBRt2/Dc ANWA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlYvFpNaKQeUTGlzJ0olFmjdBed9ymgF9/vmK9CY5Tg76NCPM6H7xTig5nM5xzElpcLM49y
X-Received: by 10.50.30.229 with SMTP id v5mr16858908igh.27.1383674556040; Tue, 05 Nov 2013 10:02:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.100] (206-248-171-209.dsl.teksavvy.com. [206.248.171.209]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id l7sm9569617igx.2.2013.11.05.10.02.34 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 05 Nov 2013 10:02:35 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <527932B9.6090502@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 13:02:33 -0500
From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <CAGgHUiS326saNJ7-0RmVQXYaJBW6Qmo=r9-oYmGiUzP-sDTcXQ@mail.gmail.com> <CE9E89B3.1BE14%mzanaty@cisco.com> <CAAJUQMjsO_Rj50Umtyhd09tpWYMc2dGi2tFPdbL9wD4Phn2+=g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAAJUQMjsO_Rj50Umtyhd09tpWYMc2dGi2tFPdbL9wD4Phn2+=g@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI
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: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 18:04:08 -0000
On 05/11/2013 12:23 PM, Wolfgang Beck wrote:
> H.264 for legacy interop, VP8 for the use cases where the MPEG LA's
> licensing conditions might get into the way of a novel service..
> sounds like a good compromise. Of course this moves the complexity
> from the network (video transcoding gateways) into the browser. As
> transcoding gateways don't scale well, I'd prefer the browser support
> for both codecs.
You're always free to use H.264 for legacy interop. I don't see why
this means it should be MTI (forcing everyone to pay a license or jump
through distribution loopholes).
Gili
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Leon Geyser
- [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Hutton, Andrew
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Martin Thomson
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Leon Geyser
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Wolfgang Beck
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Mo Zanaty (mzanaty)
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Mohammed Raad
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Karl Stahl
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Justin Uberti
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Markus.Isomaki
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI bryandonnovan
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Justin Uberti
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Mohammed Raad
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Ron
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI David Singer
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Daniel-Constantin Mierla
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Mohammed Raad
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI David Singer
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Ron
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Mohammed Raad
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI David Singer
- Re: [rtcweb] Making both VP8 and H264 MTI Martin J. Dürst