Definition of the Opus Audio Codec
RFC 6716

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>,
    codec mailing list <codec@ietf.org>,
    codec chair <codec-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Protocol Action: 'Definition of the Opus Audio Codec' to Proposed Standard (draft-ietf-codec-opus-16.txt)

The IESG has approved the following document:
- 'Definition of the Opus Audio Codec'
  (draft-ietf-codec-opus-16.txt) as Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Internet Wideband Audio Codec Working
Group.

The IESG contact persons are Robert Sparks and Gonzalo Camarillo.

A URL of this Internet Draft is:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-codec-opus/


Working Group Summary

The chairs believe there is good consensus behind the document,
particularly around the technology. There has not been any significant
disagreement on any of the technical aspects of the codec. However, the
working group has left the detailed specification work to the small
author team. There are several vocal participants who continue to
express dissatisfaction over the testing and codec validation associated
with the work. The WG chairs do not believe that there was consensus to
make these changes.

This document has been the subject of a number of IPR declarations.
See:

Microsoft: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1670/
Skype: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1602/
Broadcom: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1526/
Xiph: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1524/
Qualcomm: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1520/
Huawei: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1712/
Huawei: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/1741/

The WG has had an opportunity to review these disclosures in Last Call
and has opted to proceed with document publication.


Document Quality

There is an existing implementation - the reference implementation which
is included in the appendix of the document and has been maintained by
the authors of the specification. One of the authors developed several
independent decoder implementations in order to help validate the
specification. There are no known alternative encoder
implementations. There are no significant reviewers worth noting beyond
the author team.

The codec has gone through a great degree of testing that demonstrates
its quality. Test results can be found at:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-codec-results/.


Personnel

Shepherd: Jonathan D. Rosenberg, Ph.D. <jdrosen@jdrosen.net>
Responsible AD: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> 


RFC Editor Note:

Please replace the instances of rfcXXXX in this document with rfc number assigned for this draft.

Please work with the draft editors to replace rfcXXXX as it appears in the files in the appendix with the rfc number assigned for this draft.

Please work with the draft editors to ensure that the following is added (with XXXX replaced appropriately) to  the README file in the appendix: "These files were extracted from RFCXXXX. Please see that RFC for additional information."