Re: MTI Codec

* Matthew Kaufman (SKYPE) wrote:
>As I'm sure many of the people on this list are aware, the IETF RTCWEB 
>working group intends to make a decision regarding a 
>mandatory-to-implement video codec for WEBRTC.
>It feels to me like mandating a codec (as it is part of the browser, not 
>a choice of on-the-wire format, already selected to be DTLS-SRTP) is 
>really the business of this W3C Working Group, not the IETF, just as the 
>JavaScript API is the business of this WG.

"Implementations of this IETF standard MUST implement video codec X" and
"Implementations of this W3C standard MUST implement video codec X" are
not the same statements and are not mutually exclusive.

The IETF might require a certain video codec to facilitate diagnostics
across all implementations of the protocol, while the W3C might require
another video codec for other purposes, for instance. If it is possible
to implement the IETF standard without also implementing the W3C one,
the IETF would have to require the codec they want in its documents and
cannot leave it to the W3C. So you are framing the question incorrectly.
Björn Höhrmann · ·
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 ·
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · 

Received on Saturday, 14 September 2013 12:41:44 UTC