Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process

Jack Moffitt <jack@metajack.im> Thu, 21 November 2013 22:42 UTC

Return-Path: <metajack@gmail.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 99A5F1AE3B3 for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:42:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, 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 GHmXfa6LHrJq for <rtcweb@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:42:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-oa0-x233.google.com (mail-oa0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4003:c02::233]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32CA71AE3AC for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:42:05 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-oa0-f51.google.com with SMTP id i7so501793oag.38 for <rtcweb@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:41:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=vsBFRWtzsj1SzpOsxezNRGhldIEDViORCWFYvk9Gk/U=; b=NctWeiGGeOn8UkrXDzZW00uqsvNcgq4iSLiS69GqiNhr9A+9ebH1NSkxYZSTr3rR5z 4wML0tjgBFLK0gkBsov16QKQFyCDL+OQp53JDRPoKFFnRjL1iBEw2hZnDmKeQGynG7mU habC+c6ZQ5EGwCR4qGvPrlcDY9UbTQLAuOsdOycc3gMARc3TikvOXnOpga+cbUR1smZZ AeTr6BeahLT6AX5d9dcizYwd0I9Ri2yNy3rON2Ldxber74WOBLKXqeYf8WGobTaArDYy 7tjuiMe3ulmKyPizsHbEvOsWHMZA6B9kFrZ9+v2ngSTijjlIsF18hLyk4N7bHRW3dx+f uLZA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.182.129.201 with SMTP id ny9mr7708176obb.0.1385073718235; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:41:58 -0800 (PST)
Sender: metajack@gmail.com
Received: by 10.60.17.70 with HTTP; Thu, 21 Nov 2013 14:41:58 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <528E78E9.9010904@telecomitalia.it>
References: <528E39F4.4010706@ericsson.com> <528E5057.30408@stpeter.im> <528E78E9.9010904@telecomitalia.it>
Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 15:41:58 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: ad2WlTCKXdgrSuS6_EIuxuu_Csw
Message-ID: <CAP7VpsUPUBYvW_5A2q1OF8g=N0JRipkM6teBGgqaJnHgg8mUJA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Jack Moffitt <jack@metajack.im>
To: Enrico Marocco <enrico.marocco@telecomitalia.it>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: rtcweb@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [rtcweb] Proposed Video Selection Process
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: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 22:42:06 -0000

> The RFC series turned to success >40y ago by documenting running code and
> best practices.

All the running code for WebRTC is VP8.

Not claiming this is the best source, but the shipping implementations
of VP8 WebRTC represent ~60% of all desktop browsers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_web_browsers

This doesn't include mobile (where market share is still significant
but not as high), but the two shipping browsers have no problem with
VP8 even though they ship mobile browsers too.

Running code with majority market share doesn't seem to count for much.

jack.