Skip to main content

IETF Begins Standardization Process For Next-Generation 'NETVC' Video Codec (Daala)

Daala progress vs HEVC

After the widely adopted h.264/AVC video codec and its open source VP8 competitor from Google, we're seeing the next-generation h.265/HEVC and VP9 video codecs adopted in more hardware. Two years ago, though, work began on what was at the time a "next next-generation" open source video codec called Daala.

Daala has already been under development by Mozilla and Xiph, the non-profit organization behind the Ogg container format and the Vorbis audio codec. Xiph also worked on what later became the Opus codec, which was standardized by the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force). Opus got implemented in all browsers that support the WebRTC protocol for live video conferences over the web; thus, Xiph and the IETF already have some experience in getting codecs widely adopted.

Just as the IETF took Google's SPDY protocol and turned it into the HTTP/2 standard, IETF seems to be trying to do the same with Daala and turn it into the NETVC video codec standard. Much like Daala, NETVC seems to have largely the same main goals. The IETF wants it to be:

Optimized for real-time communications over the public InternetCompetitive with or superior to existing modern codecsViewed as having IPR licensing terms that allow for wide implementation and deployment

The web has been beholden for quite some time to proprietary patent-encumbered technologies such as h.264. This hasn't been as big of an issue as it could have been, because MPEG-LA, the group that owns the h.264 and HEVC patents, has only asked browser vendors and hardware companies to pay royalties, but not regular Internet users or small sites that put videos up.

Even so, the web has always evolved at a faster rate when using open patent-free technologies, and it would be ideal if the same spirit was maintained for any future web technologies.

One of the ways IETF wants NETVC to go beyond even HEVC in terms of efficiency and performance is by making sure that it's highly parallel and works well, not just with multiple CPU cores, but also with SIMD/GPU hardware.

Although the codec will eventually be supported in hardware, it can take many years to achieve ubiquity. Therefore, the IETF wants the codec to work well enough even on existing hardware in the software mode, until the dedicated hardware decoders arrive in future chips.

The Daala project was already showing great progress, but it was far from finished. Now that the IETF is taking over, it's likely going to take at least another year or two until the codec is ready to be pushed into the market. If by then NETVC manages to be so far ahead of other video codecs in terms of efficiency, then the video codec will see more adoption by browser vendors and hardware makers on its merit, without the IETF having to do too much convincing.

Follow us @tomshardware, on Facebook and on Google+.

  • zanny
    Just some nomenclature clarification: h264 is a patent encumbered protocol, it has many implementations. x264, the most popular implementation, is also free software - it just had to be developed outside the jurisdiction of US patent law, and US vendors cannot distribute their own compiled binaries of it Its fuzzy.

    Same with x265. None of these video codecs are proprietary vs open the way Libre Office vs MS Office is. Even something like WMV has draft standard document implementations to write encoding / decoding software for them.

    The only reason there can even exist a "patent encumbered video codec" is due to the continued existence of software patents in the US and pretty much no where else.
    Reply
  • m0r0nn
    IETF can't take over anything; better description wold be "Daala developers offer their codec as a base for collaborative development at IETF".
    Reply
  • photonboy
    I'm curious if EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHMS have been utilized at all in codec creation.

    By that i mean setting up the algorithm and have it create the codec within changeable parameters such as bandwidth, processing requirement etc.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    15551263 said:
    Just some nomenclature clarification: h264 is a patent encumbered protocol, it has many implementations. x264, the most popular implementation, is also free software - it just had to be developed outside the jurisdiction of US patent law, and US vendors cannot distribute their own compiled binaries of it Its fuzzy.
    Your statement that you can't redistribute x264 is incorrect. If you pay them royalties, they'll grant you a proprietary-compatible license. I think they pass on the MPEG-LA's portion of the royalties, although perhaps licensees just pay them directly.

    My company sells commercial products which include x264, and our lawyers make sure we strictly adhere to all open source licenses, patents, etc.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    15563845 said:
    I'm curious if EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHMS have been utilized at all in codec creation.

    By that i mean setting up the algorithm and have it create the codec within changeable parameters such as bandwidth, processing requirement etc.
    I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but most codecs already have parameters for controlling those sorts of things. Read up on "Profiles and Levels" and you'll get a sense for how they do it.

    However, if you mean the codec is actually a virtual machine, and the encoder generates a custom decoder along with the stream for it to decode, this is the same idea as Postscript, which is probably about 35 years old. The problem with using this for video compression is that it's hard to constrain the performance of the decoder so that it will run in realtime, on any client that supports it.

    It's worth noting that one could already do something like that with Javascript.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    BTW, I don't believe any such thing as a patent-free video codec is possible. The genius of MPEG is that they established a process (the Licensing Authority) whereby everyone who has an IP stake in the technology is incentivized to get involved and negotiate generally reasonable fees that don't unduly hinder adoption.

    And I'd rather deal with MPEG-LA, in whose self-interest it is that the technology is adopted and not tied to one vendor or service, than to hope that someone like Google remains benevolent towards users of VP8 & VP9.
    Reply
  • avada
    Just some nomenclature clarification: h264 is a patent encumbered protocol, it has many implementations. x264, the most popular implementation, is also free software - it just had to be developed outside the jurisdiction of US patent law, and US vendors cannot distribute their own compiled binaries of it Its fuzzy.

    Same with x265. None of these video codecs are proprietary vs open the way Libre Office vs MS Office is. Even something like WMV has draft standard document implementations to write encoding / decoding software for them.

    The only reason there can even exist a "patent encumbered video codec" is due to the continued existence of software patents in the US and pretty much no where else.

    On the other hand these "uncencumbered" formats are retarded by design. They avoid many straightforward or efficient algorithms, because they're patented.

    And yes, f*ck you US!
    Reply
  • avada
    I'm curious if EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHMS have been utilized at all in codec creation.

    By that i mean setting up the algorithm and have it create the codec within changeable parameters such as bandwidth, processing requirement etc.

    I highly doubt it. It seems like to me that when it comes to codec/format creation, people lack imagination and and willingness to explore.
    They just tread towards the path already taken. The only particularly significant change with dalaa is that they're using overlapping bocks instead of discrete blocks.
    Reply