Re: [rtcweb] Straw Poll on Video Codec Alternatives

[cowwoc <[e-mail]>]

Hi,

Caveat: I am answering based on the information available to me as of 
today. For example, if Cisco releases a decent H.264 software codec with 
a commercially-friendly license, I would likely revise my answer 1a from 
"No" to "Acceptable". The same is true for other answers as more 
information becomes available.

 1.

    All entities MUST support H.264

     1.

        No

     2.

        Concerned about IPR and software licensing of H.264 codec, and
        royalty fees.

 2.

    All entities MUST support VP8

     1.

        Yes

     2.


 3.

    All entities MUST support both H.264 and VP8

     1.

        Acceptable

     2.

        Same as 1b

 4.

    Browsers MUST support both H.264 and VP8, other entities MUST
    support at least one of H.264 and VP8

     1.

        Acceptable

     2.

        Non-browser interoperability is no less important than browser
        interoperability. This might not seem like a big deal today, but
        once mobile deployments increase we're likely to end up with
        federated networks.

 5.

    All entities MUST support at least one of H.264 and VP8

     1.

        No

     2.

        This does not guarantee interoperability. Basic P2P chat should
        not require transcoding.

 6.

    All entities MUST support H.261

     1.

        Acceptable

     2. Better than requiring transcoding
 7.

    There is no MTI video codec

     1.

        No

     2.

        Same as 5b

 8.

    All entities MUST support H.261 and all entities MUST support at
    least one of H.264 and VP8

     1.

        Acceptable

     2.

        I prefer option 10

 9.

    All entities MUST support Theora

     1.

        Acceptable

     2.

        Same as 6b

10.

    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.261}

     1.

        Yes

     2.


11.

    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, H.263}

     1.

        Acceptable

     2.

        Concerned about IPR status of H.263

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.

        Yes

     2.


13.

    All entities MUST support H.263

     1.

        Acceptable

     2.

        Same as 11b

14.

    All entities MUST implement at least two of {VP8, H.264, Theora}

     1.

        Yes

     2.


15.

    All entities MUST support decoding using Theora.

     1.

        Acceptable

     2.

        Same as 6b

16.

    All entities MUST support Motion JPEG

     1.

        Acceptable

     2.

        Same as 6b


Thank you,
Gili

On 09/12/2013 12:24 PM, Ted Hardie wrote:
>
> Dear WG,
>
>
> This is the email announcing the straw poll across the video codec 
> alternatives proposed to the WG. If you haven't read the "Next Steps 
> in Video Codec Selection Process" 
> (http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/rtcweb/current/msg10448.html)then please 
> do that before you continue to read.
>
>
> The straw poll's purpose is to make it clear to the WG which of the 
> alternatives that are favored or disfavored and what objections you 
> have, if any, against a particular alternative. The WG chairs will use 
> the information from this straw poll to identify an alternative to put 
> as a single consensus question to the group. Thus, everyone that has 
> an opinion on at least one alternative should answer this poll. 
> Provide your poll input by replying to this email to the WG mailing 
> list. The poll will run until the end of the 12th of January 2014.
>
>
> As can be seen below, the poll lists the alternative that have 
> proposed to the WG. For each alternative two questions are listed.
>
>
> The first question is "Are you in favor of this option 
> [Yes/No/Acceptable]:". These three levels allow you to indicate that 
> you: Yes= I would be fine with the WG choosing this option. No = I 
> really don't favor this, and it should not be picked. Acceptable = I 
> can live with this option but I prefer something else to be picked.
>
>
> The second question is "Do you have any objections to this option, if 
> so please explain it:" If you have any objection at a minimum indicate 
> it with a "Yes".   Please also add a short (1-sentence) summary of 
> each of the objections you believe applies.  (If you wish to provide a 
> longer explanation, please do so in a separate thread).  If you have 
> no objection, leave that question blank.
>
>
> Please provide input on as many of the alternatives as you like and 
> feel comfortable to do. The more inputs, the more well informed 
> decision the WG chairs can take when identifying the option to be 
> brought forward for consensus. Any alternative that you chose to leave 
> blank, will simply be considered as one without any input from you.
>
>
> WG participants, please do not comment on anyone's input in this 
> thread! If you want to comment, then create a separate thread and 
> change the subject line to something else. Otherwise you are making 
> life for the chairs very difficult to track the results of this straw 
> poll.
>
>
> If discussion causes you to update your position, please feel free to 
> send an update via email on the straw poll thread prior to the closing 
> date.
>
>
>
> 1.
>
>     All entities MUST support H.264
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>
>     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]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
> 3.
>
>     All entities MUST support both H.264 and VP8
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
> 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]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
> 5.
>
>     All entities MUST support at least one of H.264 and VP8
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
> 6.
>
>     All entities MUST support H.261
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
> 7.
>
>     There is no MTI video codec
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/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]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
> 9.
>
>     All entities MUST support Theora
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
>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]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
>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]:
>
>     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]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
>13.
>
>     All entities MUST support H.263
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/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]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
>15.
>
>     All entities MUST support decoding using Theora.
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
>16.
>
>     All entities MUST support Motion JPEG
>
>     1.
>
>         Are you in favor of this option [Yes/No/Acceptable]:
>
>     2.
>
>         Do you have any objections to this option, if so please
>         summarize them:
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rtcweb mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rtcweb