Re: [rtcweb] cisco binary on ec2

Cullen Jennings <> Tue, 26 November 2013 19:32 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BDD01ADFFD for <>; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:32:43 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V6hRZHS2eCVj for <>; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:32:41 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC5FD1ADFBD for <>; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 11:32:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] (unknown []) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2DDE509B6; Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:32:39 -0500 (EST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 6.6 \(1510\))
From: Cullen Jennings <>
In-Reply-To: <20131121234706.09a04878@rainpc>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 12:32:38 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <BLU169-W24713EECAF0BE76A85E94B93E60@phx.gbl> <> <BLU169-W19675CF49C4FAF3F889E4793E60@phx.gbl> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <20131121234706.09a04878@rainpc>
To: Lorenzo Miniero <>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1510)
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] cisco binary on ec2
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Real-Time Communication in WEB-browsers working group list <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 19:32:43 -0000

I think for a scenario like that you would use a different approach as long as you used less than 100k virtual machines - which is a reasonable assumption for all the cloud services I am aware of. You would take the source code and compile it to form the executables on the master image for the VM. You would then distribute the VM normally and not use the Cisco binary. 

The other case that has come up is a large enterprise that makes a master copy of the image that distributed to all their desktops  and it is a case where the company has over 100k desktops.  If they own the desktops my understanding is they are the end user from that point of view and as long as the IT department downloaded a copy of the Cisco binary and put it into their master image and then put that master image on computers they own / operate then that can be made to work too. 

This stuff is all sort of subtle but there seems to be a wide range of options that can be made to work and have examples of people already doing it with H264 MPEG LA licenses. 

On Nov 21, 2013, at 3:47 PM, Lorenzo Miniero <> wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:33:15 -0800
> Cullen Jennings <> wrote:
>> On Nov 21, 2013, at 12:21 PM, Matt Fredrickson <> wrote:
>>> I cannot use that on my dynamically
>>> deployed EC2 instances due to licensing restrictions. :-)
>> My understanding of the legal situation is that you can use the cisco binary on your EC2 instance and have Cisco pay the MPEG-LA fees. 
> The issue that was mentioned was cloned/frozen VM images that you could spawn to increase scalability. In that case, you would prepare/install an image just once, freeze it, and then launch a new one whenever you need it. Ideally you'd have the plugin installed that first time only, but then all cloned instances would fall out of the license agreement, as they'd actually be different machines with the plugin reinstalled rather than downloaded on the fly. Downloading the plugin for each new image that is spawned as it unfreezes would be a problem, as 1) the image wouldn't be ready right away, and 2) any problem in the download process would make the machine useless with respect to H.264.
> Lorenzo
>> _______________________________________________
>> rtcweb mailing list
> -- 
> Lorenzo Miniero, COB
> Meetecho s.r.l.
> Web Conferencing and Collaboration Tools