Re: [rtcweb] Last day for any additional Video Codec Selection alternatives

Gaelle Martin-Cocher <> Wed, 27 November 2013 16:29 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E579A1AC829 for <>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 08:29:09 -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, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id DjazIdZ9BJKL for <>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 08:29:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8871A1F7C for <>; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 08:29:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/AES128-SHA; 27 Nov 2013 11:28:58 -0500
Received: from ( by ( with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:28:58 -0500
Received: from ([fe80::fcd6:cc6c:9e0b:25bc]) by ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0158.001; Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:28:58 -0500
From: Gaelle Martin-Cocher <>
To: Magnus Westerlund <>, Emil Ivov <>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Last day for any additional Video Codec Selection alternatives
Thread-Index: AQHO606Vpz1RIQde60qEONvclkDthZo5SFkAgAAOW4D//+lHUA==
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 16:28:57 +0000
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
Accept-Language: fr-FR, en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Cc: "" <>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Last day for any additional Video Codec Selection alternatives
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: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 16:29:10 -0000

Dear All,

Sorry for this late message, I was not available this past week.

It has been mentioned by a few of us that the risks on VP8 that some can't leave with, can be mitigated when VP8 becomes an ISO standard (via MPEG). 
VP8 has a chance to become an MPEG deliverable in January. I believe that could make a few of us more comfortable with supporting/mandating both H264 and VP8 and could change the consensus reaching process.

Can we give VP8 that chance before forcing a vote?


-----Original Message-----
From: rtcweb [] On Behalf Of Magnus Westerlund
Sent: Wednesday, November 27, 2013 7:33 AM
To: Emil Ivov
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Last day for any additional Video Codec Selection alternatives

On 2013-11-27 12:41, Emil Ivov wrote:
> Just to confirm, this is NOT the last day of discussion on whether a 
> vote is the right way to do this at all, right?

No, but tomorrow a week will have passed since we chairs sent out the proposal and solicited feedback on the proposal.

> That sounds like it would still be an open question for step two here:

As we stated in this message, after the week we chairs would update the process proposal if we considered it necessary. I believe there are some clarifications that needs to be done, including the voter eligibility.

After that the stated plan was to hold a consensus call in the WG to use the proposed process.


Magnus Westerlund

Multimedia Technologies, Ericsson Research EAB/TVM
Ericsson AB                | Phone  +46 10 7148287
Färögatan 6                | Mobile +46 73 0949079
SE-164 80 Stockholm, Sweden| mailto:

rtcweb mailing list
This transmission (including any attachments) may contain confidential information, privileged material (including material protected by the solicitor-client or other applicable privileges), or constitute non-public information. Any use of this information by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately reply to the sender and delete this information from your system. Use, dissemination, distribution, or reproduction of this transmission by unintended recipients is not authorized and may be unlawful.