- From: Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 17:26:37 -0800
- To: Roman Shpount <rshpount@turbobridge.com>
- Cc: Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com>, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org>, "public-orca@w3.org" <public-orca@w3.org>
On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 5:21 PM, Roman Shpount <rshpount@turbobridge.com> wrote: > Would it make more sense to generalize a RtpContributingSource to define a > list of RTP header extensions and trigger an event every time the value set > changes: > > dictionary RtpHeaderExtension { > unsigned short id; > ArrayBuffer value; > } > > dictionary RtpContributingSource { > unsigned int csrc; > sequence<RtpHeaderExtension> headerExtensions; > } > > This way it is not limited to audio level only. > Like Justin said, it's getting quite low-level at that point. It's not much different than my "give JS access to every packet" event. > This being said, the only problem I see with all of this is that there are > scenarios (like audio level) when this event will be triggered for every > packet. This will not scale for server side applications of orca. > Since we only care about the latest values, can't we just throttle how often the event is fired? Say, every 200ms? > _____________ > Roman Shpount > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 7:56 PM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> > wrote: >> >> Yes, it's pretty low-level. For this particular use case, what you >> have is better, although I'm not sure I'd like calling it "MixerInfo". >> How about just calling them "contributing source"s? >> >> dictionary RtpContributingSource { >> unsigned int csrc; >> int audioLevel; >> } >> >> partial interface RtpReceiver { >> sequence<RtpContributingSource> getContributingSources(); >> } >> >> >> Also, is it enough to require JS to poll? Why not have an event for >> when the values change? >> >> partial interface RtpReceiver { >> // Gets sequence<RtpContributingSource> >> attribute EventHandler? oncontributingsources; >> } >> >> >> Even so, would it still be worth it to have low-level header extension >> access? It might be handy when an application wants a proprietary >> header extension sent from their "mixer". On the other hand, one >> could probably just use the data channel, like I suggested earlier :). >> >> By the way, the ease at which you put this on the RtpReceiver does >> show what an advantage it is to have it. >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 4:21 PM, Justin Uberti <juberti@google.com> wrote: >> > Having to mine through the raw packets feels like a pretty low-level API >> > to >> > me. >> > >> > I was thinking that one could interrogate the RtpReceiver object to get >> > data >> > on the most recently seen CSRCs and their corresponding energy levels. >> > Something like >> > >> > dictionary RtpCsrcInfo { >> > unsigned int csrc; >> > int audioLevel; >> > } >> > >> > dictionary RtpMixerInfo { >> > sequence<RtpCsrcInfo> csrcs; >> > } >> > >> > partial interface RtpReceiver { >> > RtpMixerInfo getMixerInfo(); >> > } >> > >> > or maybe just return a dictionary with CSRC as keys and energy levels as >> > values. >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Peter Thatcher <pthatcher@google.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> I think it would be reasonable to add some access to header extensions >> >> and CSRCs in the RtpReceiver object. >> >> >> >> >> >> Would it make sense to have a general access to such things by having >> >> general access to receive packets? It could be used like so: >> >> >> >> var receiver = new RtpReceiver(...); >> >> receiver.onpackets = function(packets) { >> >> for (var i = 0; i < packets.length; i++) { >> >> var packet = packets[i]; >> >> // Here you have access to >> >> // packet.csrcs >> >> // packet.headerExtensions >> >> } >> >> } >> >> >> >> And defined like so: >> >> >> >> partial interface RtpReceiver { >> >> // Gives a sequence of RtpPacket >> >> // Fired in "batches" of packets. >> >> attribute EventHandler? onpackets; >> >> } >> >> >> >> dictionary RtpPacket { >> >> sequence<unsigned int> csrcs; >> >> sequence<RtpHeaderExtension> headerExtensions; >> >> } >> >> >> >> dictionary RtpHeaderExtension { >> >> unsigned short id; >> >> ArrayBuffer value; >> >> } >> >> >> >> >> >> That might leave a bit of work for you to build on top of, but it >> >> would solve the "can I access header extension" issue once and for >> >> all. >> >> >> >> Would this meet your needs? >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote: >> >> > On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Peter Thatcher >> >> > <pthatcher@google.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> I guess it could continue in both. The ORCA CG might be quicker to >> >> >> integrate something into the API than the WebRTC WG. >> >> >> >> >> >> My question is the same: exactly what info do you want available in >> >> >> the JS? The CSRCs? >> >> > >> >> > Same answer then: That would be CSRCs and/or audio level header >> >> > extensions as per RFC6465. >> >> > >> >> > Emil >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > https://jitsi.org >> >> > >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 2:38 PM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> wrote: >> >> >>> I am not sure whether this discussion should only continue on one >> >> >>> of >> >> >>> the lists but until we figure that out I am going to answer here as >> >> >>> well >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Sync isn't really the issue here. It's mostly about the fact that >> >> >>> the >> >> >>> mixer is not a WebRTC entity. This means that it most likely >> >> >>> doesn't >> >> >>> even know what SCTP is, it doesn't necessarily have access to >> >> >>> signalling and above all, the mix is likely to also contain audio >> >> >>> from >> >> >>> non-webrtc endpoints. Using DataChannels in such situations would >> >> >>> likely turn out to be quite convoluted. >> >> >>> >> >> >>> Emil >> >> >>> >> >> >>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 10:18 PM, Peter Thatcher >> >> >>> <pthatcher@google.com> wrote: >> >> >>>> Over there, I suggested that you could simply send the audio >> >> >>>> levels >> >> >>>> over an unordered data channel. If you're using one >> >> >>>> IceTransport/DtlsTransport pair for both your RTP and SCTP, it >> >> >>>> would >> >> >>>> probably stay very closely in sync. >> >> >>>> >> >> >>>> On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 5:44 AM, Emil Ivov <emcho@jitsi.org> >> >> >>>> wrote: >> >> >>>>> Hey all, >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> I just posted this to the WebRTC list here: >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-webrtc/2014Jan/0256.html >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> But I believe it's a question that is also very much worth >> >> >>>>> resolving >> >> >>>>> for ORTC, so I am also asking it here: >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> One requirement that we often bump against is the possibility to >> >> >>>>> extract active speaker information from an incoming *mixed* audio >> >> >>>>> stream. Acquiring the CSRC list from RTP would be a good start. >> >> >>>>> Audio >> >> >>>>> levels as per RFC6465 would be even better. >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Thoughts? >> >> >>>>> >> >> >>>>> Emil >> >> >>> >> >> >>> -- >> >> >>> https://jitsi.org >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Emil Ivov, Ph.D. 67000 Strasbourg, >> >> > Project Lead France >> >> > Jitsi >> >> > emcho@jitsi.org PHONE: +33.1.77.62.43.30 >> >> > https://jitsi.org FAX: +33.1.77.62.47.31 >> >> >> > >> >
Received on Wednesday, 29 January 2014 01:27:45 UTC