Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan
Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com> Fri, 13 September 2013 17:11 UTC
Return-Path: <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
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 4B58011E8167 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Sep 2013 10:11:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.492
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.492 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.106, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, 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 mDJljDGajN2x for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 13 Sep 2013 10:11:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from blu0-omc2-s16.blu0.hotmail.com (blu0-omc2-s16.blu0.hotmail.com [65.55.111.91]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 640A111E812F for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Fri, 13 Sep 2013 10:11:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from BLU169-W111 ([65.55.111.73]) by blu0-omc2-s16.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Fri, 13 Sep 2013 10:11:47 -0700
X-TMN: [IfI0J7O9r8rvGoGlM/D8ZXgNtf77/T0B]
X-Originating-Email: [bernard_aboba@hotmail.com]
Message-ID: <BLU169-W111E8BA8C5A1AF65A7031F4933B0@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_d6f7ac9e-4613-4859-b50b-033764841a88_"
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard_aboba@hotmail.com>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 10:11:47 -0700
Importance: Normal
In-Reply-To: <CA+9kkMAvdtq_gufKmDNCNCL+kKcxyi0MGUoVHetd9_DzbEdEnA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+9kkMAvdtq_gufKmDNCNCL+kKcxyi0MGUoVHetd9_DzbEdEnA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 13 Sep 2013 17:11:47.0669 (UTC) FILETIME=[545AE050:01CEB0A4]
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan
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: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 17:11:53 -0000
Ted -- The H.264 vs. VP8 discussion has at this point been "overtaken by events", so that the proposed plan below would be a waste of everybody's time, about as relevant as debating the fashion merits of bell bottoms versus nehru jackets. With Google having announced plans to implement VP9 (potentially with SVC), and with the recent ratification of H.265, the industry has moved on, and so should RTCWEB. Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 09:52:24 -0700 From: ted.ietf@gmail.com To: rtcweb@ietf.org; fluffy@cisco.com; magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com Subject: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan WG, The chairs have created a plan for how to perform the Video Codec selection in our WG. The chairs are asking for review of our plan on how to undertake the mandatory-to-implement video codec selection. We'd much prefer to have comments on the mechanics before they begin, so please review now. Proponents of a particular proposal should note both the actions required and the timelines proposed. The main goal of this plan is to hold a consensus call on which of the proposed alternatives we as a WG should select at one of the WG sessions in Vancouver. Such a consensus call will of course be verified on the mailing list for anyone who can't participate. The chairs will recuse themselves from judging this particular consensus. In the WG session each codec proposal will be allowed an equal amount of time to highlight the arguments for their proposal. After that a there will be a slot for discussion and clarifying questions. To enable the WG participants to get answers to any questions, the proposals in draft form and any supporting material MUST be made available by 6th of October. This is to ensure that the WG participants can verify or object to any claims or statements in the proposal material prior to the WG session. We chairs would really not like to see the proponents bring up new arguments at their presentation. Also the WG participants are expected to raise any arguments on the list ahead of time to enable the proponents to respond to such arguments. The proposed consensus questions will be of the following form: 1. If you support H.264 as the mandatory to implement codec or are willing to live with it as the MTI, please raise your hand now. 2. If you support VP8 as the mandatory to implement codec or are willing to live with it as the MTI, please raise your hand now. You may indicate support on both questions and we encourage you to do so if you can live with either, even if you have a preference for one over the other. Additional proposals than the previous ones are welcome, but must be submitted as draft and their proponents must notify the chairs no later than the 6th of October that they also have a candidate proposal. In case the WG fails to reach consensus we chairs propose that we use the alternative decision process as discussed in RFC3929. The method and its usage will be discussed on the list should the WG not establish consensus on a proposal for mandatory to implement video codec. regards, Magnus, Cullen, and Ted _______________________________________________ rtcweb mailing list rtcweb@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Pete Resnick
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan John Leslie
- [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Matthew Kaufman
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Ralph Giles
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Iñaki Baz Castillo
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Adam Roach
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE)
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Pete Resnick
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Lorenzo Miniero
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Roni Even
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Bossiel
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Simon Perreault
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Bossiel
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Magnus Westerlund
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Chris Wendt
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan cb.list6
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Christer Holmberg
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan cowwoc
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Ted Hardie
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Bernard Aboba
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Eric Rescorla
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Leon Geyser
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Monty Montgomery
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Basil Mohamed Gohar
- Re: [rtcweb] Video Codec Selection Plan Gili