Re: RECAP: Conclusion: Cloning and sharing of MediaStreamTracks - worth it?

On 2013-08-21 18:15, Martin Thomson wrote:
> On 21 August 2013 06:21, Tommy Widenflycht <tommyw@google.com> wrote:
>> So a user wants to send the audio MST through PC1 (with relay) and the video
>> MST through PC2. How does this require a MST to belong to more that one MS?
>
> In order to send A on PC1 and V on PC2, you need to have separate
> MediaStream instances, one for each PC.  Maybe you could use the same
> MediaStream and synthetically reject certain m-lines from each PC, but
> that doesn't help the receiving end.
>
>> And how can there be any expectation that the audio and video are
>> synchronized on the receiving side?
>
> This has to be possible.  The two tracks have the same source, with
> the same clock, and they should have the same (RTCP) CNAME.
> Assembling the two tracks into a single MS at the receiver should
> result in the playback being synchronized.

I agree fully to this (and this is what I tried to express at the Boston 
interim).

>
>


Received on Thursday, 22 August 2013 08:16:01 UTC