Re: [rtcweb] Why voting is not a viable process for the IETF (Was: Last day for any additional Video Codec Selection alternatives )

cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org> Thu, 28 November 2013 21:49 UTC

Return-Path: <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
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 914E01AE0E1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:49:36 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] 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 YubqbjRmz9f1 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:49:35 -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 3AFC41AE06C for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:49:35 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-ie0-f169.google.com with SMTP id e14so15012060iej.14 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:49:34 -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=qJd9IoZgOhpoOpTyT1xAh1QZYkb5P96yXAP2beB+xh4=; b=RIGTIThC1QEoYwV+1/kE5CSEARdjB52JK06Oc9P269PHp49tbhID3oIl9aB1l0jnhc oiEZkP0me/abGA5wimx3+iai1lvB+7hAFn0DkFIvIsr7nQ7fXLRiJ5uy3lUJita29d1d 4TbMbNSzg9fMoukEv/jRlqI9DRazy+m1wDuy7rQ0PMl5Z2uAvkegiEeFlQY/1xu2MQ3C vYfqcLKAQ1figb8CR7h7A4rCcQC6kl181vsMlNJ/NCGLWh0eC7VI2tN+LE0hhi367HU0 AhV8h6uA7ENIk+VopX5kAW7nqpAh8KV0/6QC+BI6K2qmGP3Z69zf9ImrXiHpA9ln2dgG Ui3A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnKa0ltNkei1XXveTTiZx5K1tYo3jHK5kJyswuoUHgT1YrkS1jKJeZ5dxKAkVjc49ZUB5pl
X-Received: by 10.50.115.35 with SMTP id jl3mr3545299igb.37.1385675374102; Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:49:34 -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 hv5sm47680385igb.9.2013.11.28.13.49.32 for <rtcweb@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 28 Nov 2013 13:49:33 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <5297BA3E.9030708@bbs.darktech.org>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 16:48:46 -0500
From: cowwoc <cowwoc@bbs.darktech.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <CEBBC7E7.1F4ED%mzanaty@cisco.com> <529680EF.4010908@jitsi.org> <5296BA5E.20801@bbs.darktech.org> <5297AFA8.5000107@jitsi.org>
In-Reply-To: <5297AFA8.5000107@jitsi.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Why voting is not a viable process for the IETF (Was: Last day for any additional Video Codec Selection alternatives )
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, 28 Nov 2013 21:49:36 -0000

On 28/11/2013 4:03 PM, Emil Ivov wrote:
> Voting "No MTI" is a very different position than not agreeing with a 
> vote.

It is my understanding that you are advocating that IETF abandon its 
attempt to mandate an MTI codec. How is this any different (on a 
practical level) than voting "No MTI"?

I'd rather settle on the 3rd-best codec than no MTI at all. Whether we 
reach a compromise through voting or alternative approaches such as the 
one brought up by Gaëlle doesn't really concern me.

Gili