Re: [video-codec] Charter issues from BoF - fine grain features

"Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com> Tue, 15 January 2013 04:28 UTC

Return-Path: <fluffy@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6148421F8763 for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:28:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id n389rgStVEKg for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:28:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com [173.37.86.72]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D729B21F8742 for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:28:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1330; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1358224124; x=1359433724; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:references: in-reply-to:content-id:content-transfer-encoding: mime-version; bh=nWsCdghbNYPgFr3FRD6Ze1mWNYkP6dXEo0vQf3//V+0=; b=f7ifWw0gmHLNJ5xHPopJ/jy5MGBrtBpZgE5g/7M7NfFtWeyxzTkXyuqX WEJtldG9gdoMEG9LP8w1iOCGDguFQkzvGPPth568f345kiqwOD3cWYTpY 839P0THaMl3Cq44HIV1s31evjgUqyMtgHR0z7xrshIsj8YgGl++jJFUXY Y=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AoYFAEHa9FCtJV2d/2dsb2JhbABEujuDOBZzgh8BAQQ6PxACAQgiFBAyJQIEDgUIiBGoBI4mjGuDYmEDplSCaA2CJA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,469,1355097600"; d="scan'208";a="162208854"
Received: from rcdn-core-6.cisco.com ([173.37.93.157]) by rcdn-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 15 Jan 2013 04:28:44 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com [173.36.12.88]) by rcdn-core-6.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r0F4SiNR012089 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 15 Jan 2013 04:28:44 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com ([169.254.5.197]) by xhc-aln-x14.cisco.com ([173.36.12.88]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.004; Mon, 14 Jan 2013 22:28:44 -0600
From: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
To: "Timothy B. Terriberry" <tterribe@xiph.org>
Thread-Topic: [video-codec] Charter issues from BoF - fine grain features
Thread-Index: AQHN8tjNSeJqw7Bk3ESTqybpGfHvYg==
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 04:28:43 +0000
Message-ID: <C5E08FE080ACFD4DAE31E4BDBF944EB11337D2BE@xmb-aln-x02.cisco.com>
References: <20121106112625.2btpoxrylcgg8w4c@kizuka.merseine.nu>
In-Reply-To: <20121106112625.2btpoxrylcgg8w4c@kizuka.merseine.nu>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [10.20.249.164]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <1417D1988D107C4B9791C57112B315D3@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Cc: "<video-codec@ietf.org>" <video-codec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [video-codec] Charter issues from BoF - fine grain features
X-BeenThere: video-codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: Video codec BoF discussion list <video-codec.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/video-codec>, <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/video-codec>
List-Post: <mailto:video-codec@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec>, <mailto:video-codec-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 04:28:45 -0000

On Nov 6, 2012, at 9:26 AM, Timothy B. Terriberry <tterribe@xiph.org> wrote:

>> 
>> 9. Use signaling to have fine grained enablement of features.
> 
> Regardless of any IPR implications, this feels like a technical discussion. I.e., there are implications about interoperability, profiling, and testing here. You don't want more than 8...10 of these, or you add an enormous burden if you want to test all combinations exhaustively. I'm not saying this is a bad idea, just that there's a lot of details to work through (beyond the obvious "what features should the flags affect?"). If someone has an idea of something useful we can say in the charter on this subject, I'm all ears.

I'm not suggesting we would test ever possible combination of features - I think we would test some logical subset we cared about. Even with no features like this, it's hard to test all possible things that could happen given the complex code paths in a video codec. With a codec like VP8, just picking the input parameters you are going to test with already make a space that is way too large to test.  I'm not convinced this will make it a much harder but I agree not all possible features sets would be tested. 

Just consider the vector of enabled features an input parameter :-)