IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [rtcweb] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-10.txt> (WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing Requirements) to Proposed Standard

Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no> Thu, 03 March 2016 11:49 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 DF8761A90CA for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 03:49:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.206
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.206 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.006] 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 clwOav0pt-hp for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 03:49:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mork.alvestrand.no (mork.alvestrand.no [158.38.152.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C0C9F1A90C9 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 03:49:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4ED27C79C2; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 12:49:19 +0100 (CET)
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 M8d85dT-a10J; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 12:49:19 +0100 (CET)
Received: from [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:1:39f3:54ad:a6bd:8883] (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:de0a:1:39f3:54ad:a6bd:8883]) by mork.alvestrand.no (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C70047C79C0; Thu, 3 Mar 2016 12:49:18 +0100 (CET)
To: "Asveren, Tolga" <tasveren@sonusnet.com>, Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
References: <20160224213121.376.85278.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CA+9kkMAk_jPu5Pd1kU6aEh2au5x-tE4v+c9zU5nzx64t47DUmQ@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB15518F98FD31A3BAE6505079B2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <56D55FE9.60408@alvestrand.no> <SN1PR0301MB15512FBBCA5186B4829FEFA8B2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <1447FA0C20ED5147A1AA0EF02890A64B374B9596@ESESSMB209.ericsson.se> <SN1PR0301MB1551D1333297368D66B150ACB2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CAD5OKxvf+HBknqxXXY=_t9sCFGUFMUczu6k5DkMS-M8aV0Sjxw@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB1551006A8D73179743E85322B2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CA+9kkMBGzjJFbLpo4te12tpaFFS_aoEXmoARudkq1EbZ5AnuYw@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB1551CDEEA6EA1C7A696972B7B2BB0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> <CA+9kkMA++uB6p0QYgWtgYtd9ysa9F5jb2wZnSm=Q-Fgig06_zg@mail.gmail.com> <SN1PR0301MB15514DE72ED6C92766D32E80B2BD0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
From: Harald Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>
Message-ID: <56D824BD.2080305@alvestrand.no>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 12:49:17 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <SN1PR0301MB15514DE72ED6C92766D32E80B2BD0@SN1PR0301MB1551.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rtcweb/wh-GE06e7yI6S-bsOvRUNTfrswY>
Cc: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Fwd: Last Call: <draft-ietf-rtcweb-audio-10.txt> (WebRTC Audio Codec and Processing Requirements) to Proposed Standard
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 03 Mar 2016 11:49:24 -0000

Den 03. mars 2016 11:47, skrev Asveren, Tolga:
> i- But is “X told so” really a technical argument and shouldn’t we base
> our decisions on technical aspects? What I am suggesting (browsers
> supporting “default” values instead of “enforced ranges”) has the
> technical merits that it both provides flexibility for application,
> which know what they are doing and need the flexibility, and at the same
> time covers the case of non-savvy users.

You've made this argument before. I cannot see that anything new has
been brought to the table that is likely to alter the WEBRTC WG
consensus to have these enforced limits.

> ii- RTCWeb is not only about browsers. There are gateways and native
> applications as well. RTCWeb specifications should cover use by all
> these types of entities IMHO.

The API is about a Javascript interface, and it is the remit of the W3C
WEBRTC WG. You're on the wrong list.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email