Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video codec, charter, RFC 3929)
Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Mon, 18 November 2013 04:47 UTC
Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 EB0D111E84CA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 20:47:20 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 0k6t1V97he9p for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 20:47:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no (eikenes.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0678B11E8283 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Sun, 17 Nov 2013 20:47:01 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07EE939E05D for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 05:46:59 +0100 (CET)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at eikenes.alvestrand.no
Received: from eikenes.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (eikenes.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id hzzQyUQiFqX8 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 05:46:57 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [172.30.42.117] (c-58f0e555.03-217-73746f1.cust.bredbandsbolaget.se [85.229.240.88]) by eikenes.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BD5A939E029 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 18 Nov 2013 05:46:57 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <52899BC0.2030909@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 05:46:56 +0100
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <BLU169-W413B6A0584136B67EC8A8A93F90@phx.gbl> <5645151759529247262@unknownmsgid>
In-Reply-To: <5645151759529247262@unknownmsgid>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------000401000207070702040406"
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video codec, charter, RFC 3929)
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: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 04:47:21 -0000
On 11/17/2013 10:43 PM, Varun Singh wrote: > +1, to focus on engineering and operational issues. Since firewall traversal was deemed to be a subject so specialized we couldn't debate it on the main list, perhaps we could have an MTI-only sublist? I'll personally commit to reading every message on it, but I suspect there are people on this mailing list who would like not to. > > On Nov 14, 2013, at 1:06, Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com > <mailto:bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>> wrote: > >> Keith Drage said: >> >> "Agree >> >> I am at the point where I would prefer to spend the meeting cycles >> getting things we can agree on, rather than where we seem to be at >> the moment with an issue where there are two clear camps and no real >> sign of a compromise. >> >> Ultimately the market will decide (and some parts of it probably have >> already decided - which is probably the reason for no progress). >> >> Keith" >> >> [BA] Well said. With most of the RTCWEB WG drafts either having >> completed WGLC or being candidates for WGLC by the end of the year, >> with some elbow grease it seems very possible to move the bulk of the >> documents to IETF last call within a few months at most. Polishing >> the RTCWEB document set would yield multiple benefits. Not only >> would it get us closer to the goal of standardizing the WebRTC >> protocol stack, but also might well turn up an issue or two we >> haven't thought enough about. Also, once we move the protocol stack >> further along, we'll have more cycles to spend on operational issues >> (like monitoring concerns discussed in XRBLOCK), which currently >> limit the ability to deploy WebRTC at very large scale. >> Unfortunately, we've been spending so much time on the MTI video >> codec debate that less glamorous (but ultimately much more important) >> engineering work is being neglected. >> >> This is all by way of seconding your point that there is a real >> opportunity cost to the never-ending, energy sapping MTI codec >> discussion. Personally, I'd much rather redirect the work of the >> Internet Engineering Task Force RTCWEB WG away from amateur lawyering >> toward engineering where we actually have expertise and could >> potentially make a difference. >> _______________________________________________ >> rtcweb mailing list >> rtcweb@ietf.org <mailto:rtcweb@ietf.org> >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb > > > _______________________________________________ > rtcweb mailing list > rtcweb@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb -- Surveillance is pervasive. Go Dark.
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Göran Eriksson AP
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Erik Lagerway
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Chris Wendt
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Parthasarathi R
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Varun Singh
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Harald Alvestrand
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Chenxin (Xin)
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Matt Fredrickson
- Re: [rtcweb] opportunity cost (was MTI video code… Varun Singh