- From: Iñaki Baz Castillo <ibc@aliax.net>
- Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2017 22:45:25 +0200
- To: "Cullen Jennings (fluffy)" <fluffy@cisco.com>
- Cc: Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com>, Sergio Garcia Murillo <sergio.garcia.murillo@gmail.com>, "public-webrtc@w3.org" <public-webrtc@w3.org>
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 6:30 PM, Cullen Jennings (fluffy)
<fluffy@cisco.com> wrote:
> The app needs to be able to have control of the encodings and browser needs to just enforce that the the boundaries placed by other envelopes such as SDP and congestion controls are not exceeded.
SDP? should I understand that there are plans to make SDP still more
complex and error prune by (somehow) signaling SVC layers on it?
AFAIK the only "we have" right now is RFC 5583 which shows an SVC
example as follows:
v=0
o=svcsrv 289083124 289083124 IN IP4 host.example.com
s=LAYERED VIDEO SIGNALING Seminar
t=0 0
c=IN IP4 192.0.2.1/127
a=group:DDP L1 L2 L3
m=video 40000 RTP/AVP 96 97
b=AS:90
a=framerate:15
a=rtpmap:96 H264/90000
a=rtpmap:97 H264/90000
a=mid:L1
m=video 40002 RTP/AVP 98 99
b=AS:64
a=framerate:15
a=rtpmap:98 H264-SVC/90000
a=rtpmap:99 H264-SVC/90000
a=mid:L2
a=depend:98 lay L1:96,97; 99 lay L1:97
m=video 40004 RTP/AVP 100 101
b=AS:128
a=framerate:30
a=rtpmap:100 H264-SVC/90000
a=rtpmap:101 H264-SVC/90000
a=mid:L3
a=depend:100 lay L1:96,97; 101 lay L1:97 L2:99
Wow! each SVC layer in a different m= section!!! so when it comes to
WebRTC this will be UnifiedPlan^2, cool!
...and unfeasible. That won't work.
--
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>
Received on Thursday, 21 September 2017 20:46:09 UTC