IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Straw Poll on Video Codec Alternatives

Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com> Tue, 10 December 2013 11:13 UTC

Return-Path: <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.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 501611ADBC7 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 03:13:41 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.94
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.94 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HELO_EQ_SE=0.35, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 VWfl-jy-37zp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 03:13:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sessmg20.mgmt.ericsson.se (sessmg20.ericsson.net [193.180.251.50]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEA731AD8F7 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 03:13:36 -0800 (PST)
X-AuditID: c1b4fb32-b7f108e0000030dd-a4-52a6f75af3d1
Received: from ESESSHC001.ericsson.se (Unknown_Domain [153.88.253.125]) by sessmg20.mgmt.ericsson.se (Symantec Mail Security) with SMTP id B8.09.12509.A57F6A25; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 12:13:31 +0100 (CET)
Received: from ESESSMB209.ericsson.se ([169.254.9.26]) by ESESSHC001.ericsson.se ([153.88.183.21]) with mapi id 14.02.0347.000; Tue, 10 Dec 2013 12:13:30 +0100
From: Stefan Håkansson LK <stefan.lk.hakansson@ericsson.com>
To: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>, "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, Gonzalo Camarillo <gonzalo.camarillo@ericsson.com>, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>
Thread-Topic: [rtcweb] Straw Poll on Video Codec Alternatives
Thread-Index: AQHO9QOTUcWdUHkeQ02ZdrCIO2s3wg==
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:13:30 +0000
Message-ID: <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B1C415C86@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se>
References: <CA+9kkMBSpDLJBBbPxgyMUi+bi3aw3D8zpSXcAvQ4koi115QqBg@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [153.88.183.18]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Brightmail-Tracker: H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFrrGLMWRmVeSWpSXmKPExsUyM+JvrW7092VBBn+SLDoms1lM7bO1WPuv nd2ica6dA4vHlN8bWT12zrrL7rFkyU8mj8kbZ7EEsERx2aSk5mSWpRbp2yVwZTw484S9YL5T xbfJx5gbGH8YdDFyckgImEg8uLqGCcIWk7hwbz0biC0kcIJRYtODpC5GLiB7MaPEo9Y/7CAJ NoFAia37FrCBJEQEfjJKfD6+Gaibg0NYwEbiwx0BkBoRAVuJF7u3sUDYehJ/984B62URUJXY 0dIEtoxXwFfi3NV1rBDLAiS+bVsGVs8IdMT3UxAHMQuIS9x6Mh/qOAGJJXvOM0PYohIvH/9j hbAVJT6+2scIUa8ncWPqFDYIW1ti2cLXzBC7BCVOznzCMoFRZBaSsbOQtMxC0jILScsCRpZV jJLFqcXFuelGBnq56bkleqlFmcnFxfl5esWpmxiBcXNwy2+jHYwn99gfYpTmYFES573OWhMk JJCeWJKanZpakFoUX1Sak1p8iJGJg1OqgdFDPUfN2VrpvlitondHpZ5oisktj8lL6z/FPCrS ke7jWDDxgO00/9icJ6e5b2leeeutHDEpt21KK48Bx/HoZd9e6bxRuXPQS774i4zhlcSZ80PS jRJ4PPx5rV5PuS9mv2L77k5T8XWrRKbaCjVYl+Q9Sf0xOfpJmvD+s0cZdy74wdc2VZ8nWoml OCPRUIu5qDgRAHON105pAgAA
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Straw Poll on Video Codec Alternatives
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, 10 Dec 2013 11:13:41 -0000

I decided to skip procedural discussions and follow Adam's example and 
just answer the poll. As Ted recommended, I am repeating text instead of 
referring.

My five cents in-line.

On 2013-12-09 18:24, Ted Hardie wrote:
> Dear WG,
...
>
>
>  1.
>
>     All entities MUST support H.264
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

Yes

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
>  2.
>
>     All entities MUST support VP8
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

According to an IPR disclosure the IPR owner is unwilling to license its 
IPR needed to implement VP8. It seems senseless to mandate 
implementation of technology that can't be licensed on any terms.

>
>  3.
>
>     All entities MUST support both H.264 and VP8
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

According to an IPR disclosure the IPR owner is unwilling to license its 
IPR needed to implement VP8. It seems senseless to mandate 
implementation of technology that can't be licensed on any terms.

>
>  4.
>
>     Browsers MUST support both H.264 and VP8, other entities MUST
>     support at least one of H.264 and VP8
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

According to an IPR disclosure the IPR owner is unwilling to license its 
IPR needed to implement VP8. It seems senseless to mandate 
implementation of technology that can't be licensed on any terms.

>
>  5.
>
>     All entities MUST support at least one of H.264 and VP8
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

Accomplishes nothing since I expect all implementations to support one
of them anyway.

>
>  6.
>
>     All entities MUST support H.261
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

Inferior quality, implementations not widespread

>
>  7.
>
>     There is no MTI video codec
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

Acceptable

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
>  8.
>
>     All entities MUST support H.261 and all entities MUST support at
>     least one of H.264 and VP8
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

The fallback would be h.261, meaning inferior quality; implementations
not widespread

>
>  9.
>
>     All entities MUST support Theora
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

The licensing/IPR situation is not well understood with regards to 
Theora, nor is its performance (in terms of quality vs. bitrate)

>
> 10.
>
>     All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.261}
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

The fallback would be h.261, meaning inferior quality; implementations
not widespread

>
> 11.
>
>     All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.263}
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

Acceptable

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
> 12.
>
>     All entities MUST support decoding using both H.264 and VP8, and
>     MUST support encoding using at least one of H.264 or VP8
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

According to an IPR disclosure the IPR owner is unwilling to license its 
IPR needed to implement VP8. It seems senseless to mandate 
implementation of technology that can't be licensed on any terms.

>
> 13.
>
>     All entities MUST support H.263
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

Acceptable

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
> 14.
>
>     All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, Theora}
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

The fallback would be Theora, and for it the licensing/IPR situation is 
not well understood, nor is its performance (in terms of quality vs. 
bitrate).

>
> 15.
>
>     All entities MUST support decoding using Theora.
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

The licensing/IPR situation is not well understood with regards to 
Theora, nor is its performance (in terms of quality vs. bitrate)

>
> 16.
>
>     All entities MUST support Motion JPEG
>
>      1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:

No

>
>      2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:

The performance (in terms of quality vs. bitrate) is lousy.

>
>
>
> H.264 is a reference to the proposal in
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-burman-rtcweb-h264-proposal/
>
>
> VP8 is a reference to the proposal in
> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-alvestrand-rtcweb-vp8/
>
>
> Theora is a reference to Xiph.org Theora Specification from March 16,
> 2011 (http://www.xiph.org/theora/doc/Theora_I_spec.pdf)
>
>
> H.263 is a reference to profile 0 level 70 defined in annex X of ITU-T
> rec H.263 (http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-H.263/)
>
>
> H.261 is a reference to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4587
>
>
> Motion JPEG is a reference to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2435
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> The Chairs
>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email