If we ever get to the point where we need "VP8-MS", we can come up with a better solution if we want. I don't think it's worth adding complexity for a problem we may or may not have in the future. On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 1:40 PM, Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com> wrote: > If a given codec can only handle a single transport mode it is not an > issue. But it would be strange to have to have "VP8" and "VP8-MS" codec > names, one denoting SST-SS and the other SST-MS. > > On Jul 18, 2014, at 12:05 PM, Robin Raymond <notifications@github.com> > wrote: > > Maybe I don't understand the proposal but I don't like "magic" codec > names where I parse out meaning from the name. I'd rather have a flag and > be clear if the codec supports MSS vs not supported. You still need two > codecs in that case if the codec supports either operating mode but I don't > like the idea of parsing out "-mss" or something to know the codec supports > it. > > — > Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub > <https://github.com/openpeer/ortc/issues/108#issuecomment-49468028>. > >
Received on Friday, 18 July 2014 20:50:35 UTC