Re: [rtcweb] Query Regarding Mandatory audio codecs draft

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Mon, 28 April 2014 12:14 UTC

Return-Path: <harald@alvestrand.no>
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 1B51B1A09EF for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 05:14:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651] 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 XGEgqzNQxtE2 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 05:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38C2C1A09EA for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 05:14:24 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BA7F7C5318 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:14:23 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at alvestrand.no
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mork.alvestrand.no [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5kqSZ6tCw4Zd for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:14:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from hta-hippo.lul.corp.google.com (unknown [IPv6:2620:0:1043:1:7646:a0ff:fe90:e2bb]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6562C7C51B4 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:14:22 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <535E461E.8080803@alvestrand.no>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 14:14:22 +0200
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: rtcweb@ietf.org
References: <CAB1_PA7n64TzN4RPM27P0dQ=fMZNnueQ+kc_P6=2CWsioOq+7w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB1_PA7n64TzN4RPM27P0dQ=fMZNnueQ+kc_P6=2CWsioOq+7w@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/wQfRfengf4-Vogf0Vh1l422hBHU
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Query Regarding Mandatory audio codecs draft
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: Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:14:29 -0000

On 04/28/2014 11:25 AM, Steev James wrote:
> Means you say that G.711 uses less bandwidth than Opus at the expense 
> of complexity.

G.711 gives very low audio quality. The larger complexity of Opus means 
that it is able to give a much better quality at the same bandwidth.

Personal opinion: The only time I'd be wanting to use G.711 if Opus is 
available is when I'm on a severely underpowered mobile phone. That 
platform is likely also so weak that I couldn't even imagine using video 
on it (video is order-of-magnitude more complex to encode/decode than Opus).