Subject: [payload] #12 (rtp-h265): The max-fps parameter

From: "payload issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2014 16:47:54 -0000

#12: The max-fps parameter

 The parameter max-fps breaks the fundamental design principle that a
 receiver shall be capable of decoding all bitstreams that conforms to the
 level indicated by level-id. All other receiver capabilities express
 things a receiver is capable of in addition to the indicated level (max-
 br, max-cpb, etc). I do not see why there would be motivation to break
 this design principle for this specific case.

 An option would be to let max-fps be an indicative parameter specifying
 what is the maximum fps a receiver is capable of displaying. I.e. to
 indicate that even though the receiver can decode all bitstream conforming
 to the level it might not have rendering and/or display capabilities to
 display all decoded pictures (and thus only a subset of the decoded
 pictures will be displayed).

-- 
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
 Reporter:                           |      Owner:  draft-ietf-payload-
  [email-masked]    |  [email-masked]
     Type:  defect                   |     Status:  new
 Priority:  major                    |  Milestone:
Component:  rtp-h265                 |    Version:  2.0
 Severity:  -                        |   Keywords:
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/payload/trac/ticket/12>
payload <http://tools.ietf.org/payload/>

---

From: "payload issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 22:09:05 -0000

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 Yet another good catch. I agree. The wording should be clarified in the
 way to mention other processing such as rendering capabilities, but not
 that decoding of the picture rate is a problem.

 Severity:  -                        |  Resolution:
 Keywords:                           |

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/payload/trac/ticket/12#comment:1>
payload <http://tools.ietf.org/payload/>

---

From: "payload issue tracker" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 23:05:06 -0000

Comment (by [email-masked]):

 Uh, no.
 Wasn't max_fps specifically introduced to indicate decoder performance
 points *outside* the level structure?  For example, that one could signal
 the capability for decoding of a 4k picture, but only at frame rates of 4
 fps (for still images).  Anyone here form Tandberg/Cisco who has an
 opinion?

Ticket URL: <http://trac.tools.ietf.org/wg/payload/trac/ticket/12#comment:2>
payload <http://tools.ietf.org/payload/>