IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [video-codec] Comments on draft-maxwell-videocodec-requirements-00

"Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com> Tue, 04 December 2012 23:46 UTC

Return-Path: <abegen@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 B29C921F858C for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:46:17 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.299
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.299 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 zuHkD4mzLags for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:46:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com [173.37.86.80]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD5AE21F8521 for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 15:46:15 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=1304; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1354664776; x=1355874376; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:content-id: content-transfer-encoding:mime-version; bh=Nd7/C7wnsoYnNFu+4sqaihIB9S0GGOxNbOKTspJvbGc=; b=nJpmSZfC/0z8qXmURcHtbbsx+uJFuRmlcM06cC9ODo7fyOW/Hq9EFXYf g3DzBtbypcUZZkkoqRBUECSkCDhuYYiSkXoxir9ZvPQQMRkxeI1YRmm6i nc8GRJhqw+SQZEP3iFUIZJTb5FRGhvkSBfnFZI6/Qoo/ba6rTnUiSrnTJ E=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAN2KvlCtJV2b/2dsb2JhbABEgmy7SBZzgh4BAQEEAQEBNzQXBgEIEQMBAgEKFDcLHQgCBAESCIgIAQuwJZBNBIw3g2BhA6ZKgnKCIQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="5400,1158,6916"; a="146420317"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rcdn-iport-9.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Dec 2012 23:46:15 +0000
Received: from xhc-aln-x15.cisco.com (xhc-aln-x15.cisco.com [173.36.12.89]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id qB4NkF9b016987 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL); Tue, 4 Dec 2012 23:46:15 GMT
Received: from xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com ([fe80::747b:83e1:9755:d453]) by xhc-aln-x15.cisco.com ([173.36.12.89]) with mapi id 14.02.0318.001; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 17:46:15 -0600
From: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
To: "Timothy B. Terriberry" <tterribe@xiph.org>, "video-codec@ietf.org" <video-codec@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: [video-codec] Comments on draft-maxwell-videocodec-requirements-00
Thread-Index: AQHN0nmLwAXAtrgS4E6eh0qB3NACUQ==
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 23:46:14 +0000
Message-ID: <C15918F2FCDA0243A7C919DA7C4BE994060E8796@xmb-aln-x01.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <50BE8A4A.4050907@xiph.org>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.2.5.121010
x-originating-ip: [10.86.247.1]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <DA974341DAB1634AB713C4597F142630@cisco.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [video-codec] Comments on draft-maxwell-videocodec-requirements-00
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, 04 Dec 2012 23:46:17 -0000

-----Original Message-----
From: "Timothy B. Terriberry" <tterribe@xiph.org>
Date: Tuesday, December 4, 2012 6:42 PM
To: "video-codec@ietf.org" <video-codec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [video-codec] Comments
on	draft-maxwell-videocodec-requirements-00

>Ali C. Begen (abegen) wrote:
>>> This is something I hope rmcat will explore in more detail, though I
>>> recognize it's hard to evaluate. One idea that occurs to me is actually
>>> using VBR video and padding it with FEC data to get something closer to
>>> CBR. That might actually be a better use of the bits.
>>
>> I doubt it. If a frame (or slide) has less bits due to VBR encoding,
>>that
>> means it is easier to encode it, which implies it is less important than
>> the one that has more bits. FEC'ing these frames will not make the
>>stream
>> CBR.
>
>Well, the idea would be to put the redundant information from the larger
>(more important) frames in space you didn't use in the smaller frames,
>to protect against lost packets in those frames.

That is possible but that will introduce potentially long delays (which we
don't want in video-codec).

-acbegen

>_______________________________________________
>video-codec mailing list
>video-codec@ietf.org
>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/video-codec

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email