On 5 October 2011 13:25, Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Taken in combination, I cannot imagine any reason to use any audio > codec other than MP3 or AC2 (or some other similar legacy scheme) once > we can be assured that the corresponding patents have expired. I'm not familiar with AC2, but if you mean traditional audio codecs like MP3, AC3, and Vorbis, these all have a high encoding (and decoding) latency which makes them unsuitable for interactive applications. Addressing that, as much as the (almost 4-fold!) bandwidth reduction over legacy codecs, is what we're trying achieve with this working group. This is reflected in the requirements document published as RFC 6366 where low coding latency is a primary attribute of each use case. That doesn't have much to do with your comments on the other IPR issues, but I hope it explains why we can't just use mp3. Separately, mp3 is in fact still covered by patents, at least according to wikipedia[2], so that is not an IPR free solution for some years yet, even if it were technically suitable. -r [1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6366 [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MP3#Licensing_and_patent_issues _______________________________________________ Ietf mailing list Ietf@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf