Re: [rtcweb] MTI Video Codec: a novel proposal

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Tue, 11 November 2014 05:35 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 BAFC91ACFEB for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:35:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.494
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.494 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.594] 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 zWb5Usv4ppL1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:35:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [IPv6:2001:700:1:2::117]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C88D81A88F6 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:35:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id D74CA7C053A for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:35:38 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Nw4zLZSIw1WI for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:35:28 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:67c:370:176:4805:b828:f652:a1bd] (t2001067c037001764805b828f652a1bd.wireless-a.v6.meeting.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:67c:370:176:4805:b828:f652:a1bd]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4EE287C0531 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 11 Nov 2014 06:35:28 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <5461A019.6030108@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2014 21:35:21 -0800
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <54601E19.8080203@nostrum.com> <176316D6-D685-45F4-AA8E-A4F07521CAE4@matthew.at> <1D5CFB04-2CCB-424C-A364-1CAA05E84D12@apple.com> <20141111011054.GR8092@hex.shelbyville.oz> <E18B79D1-D8C8-4A17-A2F0-93BDAAFED698@apple.com> <BE15C090-239F-45BC-8747-501AC86653B2@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <BE15C090-239F-45BC-8747-501AC86653B2@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/mG36G3__kQ7biQzRKUp8WqBDc-U
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] MTI Video Codec: a novel proposal
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, 11 Nov 2014 05:35:41 -0000

On 11/10/2014 07:19 PM, Bernard Aboba wrote:
> I do not get it either. It seems like mobile apps (which count as devices) using a WEBRTC stack now have to include both codecs regardless of whether they need them. Do we really think app developers will pay attention? Why should they?

Because they can then depend on interoperability with other non-browsers?