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

[Harald Alvestrand <[e-mail]>]

Den 29. feb. 2016 19:42, skrev Asveren, Tolga:
> I am not sure whether 40ms should be absolute minimum for all codecs.
> Even for 6000ms, who am I to argue that somebody can’t come up with a
> use case/application, which requires something longer. So, overall,
> enforcing does not seem to be the right thing IMGO (default value is
> fine as already indicated) (and I don’t fully agree with your statement
> that “the point of min/max is promoting sane values” as the model you
> are describing is  “enforcing” a range rather than a default value in
> browser/recommendation in the specification).

The point of browswers enforcing min/max is to encourage (forcefully)
application writers to write applications that run in all browsers.

The point of mandating support up to min/max is to encourage browsers to
implement something that works with all conformant applications.

There's logic to this.