IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [video-codec] The Can Has Landed

Monty Montgomery <xiphmont@gmail.com> Sun, 22 March 2015 15:22 UTC

Return-Path: <xiphmont@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EA51AC3CB for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 08:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.101
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.101 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 tHP9M8PKZv-v for <video-codec@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 08:22:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-lb0-x233.google.com (mail-lb0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c04::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 521E01AC3B3 for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 08:22:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by lbbsy1 with SMTP id sy1so103564361lbb.1 for <video-codec@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 08:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=ua+AMAK4IM51b4eU/rhJ62tV9dmIlsbJRAY2uqU6Hf4=; b=UrSRTluII8eVEIAr6uMepYu8YC76osR6QoegCk9YrQXoLFu5NYlOJXUfcsjo7q/JHT q3PTIckIGtkCiTSTRwGHPNtER3Q/Grudmnfgj/ugZCe67ESYGUegrwZoq35csPdW6272 zW4pjnDQepZJui/5dzgHY/Alvth9TdlxWluNTTc6DnupCJ0SxOAgVfZLgGSWZWmv94jD wjsqFK3chQ2usk87FBmFgqn+RQY12tQlpJBEGuJwOlcul54Isl+Sp+/64LzU5jsgXDpV aCdDMHlzm7yTPHl6rEKE2lP9AFXWVZ3eTPhE5SiThXWoZD6o7QVirWtbyCaWgyNUDxGq Ha3Q==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.144.41 with SMTP id sj9mr80156683lbb.3.1427037754818; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 08:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.112.188.134 with HTTP; Sun, 22 Mar 2015 08:22:34 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CAMzhQmPLVuCkUjr_W7vcHaU-3p4d=3T1Bq16ytu6+PTVmq94nA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACrD=+_D+psUeWevMuwp0bnxqdcJpo3Zo3Og4E6kkGH1uuzxdA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMzhQmPLVuCkUjr_W7vcHaU-3p4d=3T1Bq16ytu6+PTVmq94nA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 11:22:34 -0400
Message-ID: <CACrD=+820jfn6VE9XBpB+0Bc-Ao=0+o_5ZPfkLzvt6qyNqMc0g@mail.gmail.com>
From: Monty Montgomery <xiphmont@gmail.com>
To: Keith Winstein <keithw@cs.stanford.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/video-codec/YNvWhkvglijZrk9KZoFt9_zKUEg>
Cc: "video-codec@ietf.org" <video-codec@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [video-codec] The Can Has Landed
X-BeenThere: video-codec@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 15:22:50 -0000

I know Thomas already responded, but...

On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 7:35 PM, Keith Winstein <keithw@cs.stanford.edu> wrote:
> But what are the merits of an IETF working group performing this kind of
> high-risk, high-reward research, versus doing something much more boring
> like "writing a specification for VP9 to enable interoperable
> implementations, and then iterating on that technology"?

Personally, I'd like to see Google submit their VPx work as an input
to this process and even more interested in seeing them participate in
development.  Just like with Opus, I don't think the IETF is
interested (and I'm certainly not interested) in rubber-stamping an
existing codec.

...it would also go a long way toward repairing VP9's image in the
marketplace.  Like it or not, the conventional wisdom is 'VP9 is a
proprietary codec with uncertain IPR status'.  IP is obviously a major
concern of ours, and we don't believe a strategy of 'we'll just win in
court' is likely to win an adoption war.

Monty

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email