Re: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs

["Richard Shockey" <[e-mail]>]

Reading this list is occasionally an act of torture banned by several
conventions ..but since you ask.

I completely support the selection of Opus and G.711 as mandatory to
implement audio codec's ..however I'm very very open minded about supporting
G.722. It has it merits.  It should be totally obvious to most that if you
even think about interconnecting to public E.164 networks the default option
for VoLTE and Enterprise Voice networks is going to be G.722. 

If it is your goal to create globally useful stove pipes fine,  but
interconnection with existing carrier real time networks is IMHO a rational
goal. 

As for Video .. for goodness sakes just get over it people. H.264 is totally
implemented everywhere on the planet Earth. So what about the intellectual
property problems. It's not like VP8 doesn't have problems either. 

I'll save my comments about the SDP offer/answer issue for another day. 

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] [mailto:[e-mail]] On Behalf Of
Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 1:16 PM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [rtcweb] Confirmation of consensus on audio codecs


At the last meeting we took a hum on selecting Opus and G.711 as the
mediatory to implement audio codecs. If there is any new opinions please
send them to the list by August 30th, after which the chairs will make a
determination of consensus.

Thanks,
Cullen

Please note that the following IPR disclosure have been made on these
codecs. They can be found at 

http://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/


2010-11-07	
. ID # 1445
"Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-00 and draft-ietf-codec-description-00 (1)"
2010-11-07	
. ID # 1446
"Xiph.Org Foundation's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-00"
2010-11-12	
. ID # 1447
"Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-00 and draft-ietf-codec-description-00 (2)"
2011-03-23	
. ID # 1520
"Qualcomm Incorporated's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
2011-03-27	
. ID # 1524
"Xiph.Org Foundation's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
2011-03-29	
. ID # 1526
"Broadcom Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
2011-03-29	
. ID # 1525
"Skype Limited's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-codec-opus-05"
2011-07-23	
. ID # 1602
"Skype Limited's Statement about IPR related to draft-ietf-codec-opus-07"
2012-01-25	
. ID # 1670
"Microsoft Corporation's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-10"
2012-03-12	
. ID # 1712
"Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-11 (1)"
2012-04-02	
. ID # 1741
"Huawei Technologies Co.,Ltd's Statement about IPR related to
draft-ietf-codec-opus-11 (2)"



_______________________________________________
rtcweb mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb