Re: [rtcweb] Plan for MTI video codec?

Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com> Tue, 21 October 2014 00:40 UTC

Return-Path: <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
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 2B9741ACE5A for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:40:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] 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 m7JFFRr1ENrb for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:40:37 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ie0-x233.google.com (mail-ie0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c03::233]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE8361A1A62 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ie0-f179.google.com with SMTP id ar1so170006iec.10 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=5HKwxJ7GwKKIlneDI8tY+JUJQFJas+AU0MQ2ZNNhRZQ=; b=iv4YOMM+/2xIy0H2iIvgOflTgkR7Xr9qfzcJ19qCaIC9NkcRc32NyYZMu1QyJovHqi z5mCSr6bmMVPAFMFaFuGvt6g8N8e72Kcc9SQFv3ZJzEPEJqAUBSGZQ5g8q9MzHhr6qop yM8073LsCSvPH3uCCrkzZNav6HOkH65dPUS/hwwK21DZLhm6hAGgZSX93iXL1bQsOigq zqhaPas9wN5Zbp4hP8BkZ5G6gDn5OcTtbt7J1NDyVr6CdbbXFQN2WF1D4vEA0VComOkr DgSwhnQuARUtgsWwl4Ip3/Gpv/tGgWFU2/BpRPXjsepEcIOaMTGXWgE9oPCY+qHR3E3L tSCw==
X-Received: by 10.42.49.8 with SMTP id u8mr29692911icf.39.1413852036150; Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:40:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.1.113] (71-94-170-52.dhcp.knwc.wa.charter.com. [71.94.170.52]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id n84sm5332941ioe.19.2014.10.20.17.40.34 for <multiple recipients> (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:40:34 -0700 (PDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
From: Bernard Aboba <bernard.aboba@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (12A405)
In-Reply-To: <CAOJ7v-0CrYEXspFU+urB-STkuD=P4jjkBOmfEWVhP_uJuQtFeA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2014 17:40:33 -0700
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <7025EA89-75F4-455A-AD90-8C5C5EFD4D5B@gmail.com>
References: <E36D1A4AE0B6AA4091F1728D584A6AD2400622F1@ORSMSX158.amr.corp.intel.com> <BBF5DDFE515C3946BC18D733B20DAD2339941A25@XMB122CNC.rim.net> <949EF20990823C4C85C18D59AA11AD8B2627F1@FR712WXCHMBA11.zeu.alcatel-lucent.com> <CAOJ7v-0CrYEXspFU+urB-STkuD=P4jjkBOmfEWVhP_uJuQtFeA@mail.gmail.com>
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/sxx6YApNHDTXin0p9FR7Nhf3TPQ
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Plan for MTI video codec?
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: Tue, 21 Oct 2014 00:40:38 -0000

On Oct 20, 2014, at 3:29 PM, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote:
> 
> An astute observer might take note of the fact that our inability to close the door on H.264 is providing an opportunity to other royalty-bearing codecs that want to join the party.

[BA] IETF WG Chairs have the ability to avoid revisiting previously settled issues (e.g. Audio codecs) or unsettled ones (e.g. Video codecs).  

BTW, I've had difficulty verifying the assertion that "AMR codecs are accessible via the hardware without additional fees". There may be an SDK available, but my understanding is that this requires a licensing fee above and beyond the fee required to license AMR codecs in Voice over LTE. In other words, not only is the codec royalty bearing, but access to it for a purpose other than VoLTE requires additional licensing fees.  If this is wrong, please point me to the web page for the appropriate license-free SDKs.