[rtcweb] Next Steps in Video Codec Selection Process

Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com> Mon, 09 December 2013 17:20 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Mon, 09 Dec 2013 09:20:27 -0800
Message-ID: <CA+9kkMDTWY9Q9FPoUcqesb6ChzyxqfXDpxJ6XjJO_5n2GTsH+A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ted Hardie <ted.ietf@gmail.com>
To: "rtcweb@ietf.org" <rtcweb@ietf.org>, Gonzalo Camarillo <Gonzalo.Camarillo@ericsson.com>, Richard Barnes <rlb@ipv.sx>, Cullen Jennings <fluffy@cisco.com>, Magnus Westerlund <magnus.westerlund@ericsson.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11c2f08a47292104ed1d36fc"
Subject: [rtcweb] Next Steps in Video Codec Selection Process
Precedence: list

Dear WG,

The WG chairs have read and considered the WG’s and the wider IETF
community's input on our proposal for video codec selection process. Based
on this we have reconsidered the next steps and have another process to try
to build and achieve consensus.

The goal of this process is to allow anyone, without exception, to provide
input on the large set of alternatives proposed to the WG, thus ensuring
that we fairly consider all the alternatives to MTI that has been raised
and allowing us all to consider if there is a compromise position that will
enable us to meet our goal to prevent interoperability failure for video
and achieve consensus in the WG.

This process is only a first step to establish a working position on which
alternative to specify in a WG document.  The WG will confirm this
consensus later in a WG last call. This will be followed by establishing
the IETF consensus on the WG document in the IETF last call.

The process we are going to use is to first run a straw poll across all
alternatives provided so far. In that straw poll anyone is free to provide
their position on each of the alternative and raise the objections they see
with each alternative.  This straw poll will not decide the issue; it is
not a vote.  It is an input to the process to identify an alternative for
the following consensus call.

At the conclusion of the straw poll, the chairs will identify an option
based on the results of the straw poll and then put it forward for a
specific yes/no consensus call on whether specific text should be added in
the WG’s documents.

A detailed message on the straw poll, with the full set of alternatives,
will follow but a summary of the overall process is thus as follows:

-- Conduct a straw poll to gather information on which option might achieve
consensus

-- Chairs identify an option based on the results of the straw poll and
issue a consensus call

-- If there is consensus (as judged by Richard Barnes), the selected option
is reflected in a WG document

-- The WG document is confirmed via the normal process of WGLC and IETF LC

A message initiating the straw poll will follow shortly.

Thanks,

The Chairs

[rtcweb] Next Steps in Video Codec Selection Proc… Ted Hardie