[NUT-devel] transport stream (for live streaming) = container + protocol IN ONE
Jörg Hartmann
jhartmann at aquilacoop.de
Mon Sep 18 16:22:54 CEST 2006
You call it "proper unix philosophy" to let the protocol handle priority
and retransmission for live streaming and not to care the least for this
when designing the container. But you probably know that a protocol needs
to know about the content of the container (droppable frames, most
important stream/channel/pictures/info parts etc.) to handle that
efficiently. And that the overheads of both container and surrounding
protocol add up. And you probably also know that transport streams for
"live streaming" or "live broadcasting" (like MPEG-TS) are for good reasons
designed as both in one: protocol and container. Or INSTEAD of both. So my
question is: If you only create a container, and while doing that don't
even think of how a live-streaming protocol for its use might look like,
why do you think that any non-idiot would use it for live streaming at all
- instead of a transport stream that is designed from the start to handle
the whole of live streaming? Or if you plan to use it for live streaming:
why don't you at least take the protocol part (and how both parts add up to
an efficient transport system)into consideration (now and not after 1.0)?
Cheers,
J.H.
More information about the NUT-devel
mailing list