- From: Randell Jesup <randell-ietf@jesup.org>
- Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 03:07:11 -0400
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 3/18/2014 3:09 PM, Martin Thomson wrote: > Actually, you are all making it harder than it needs to be. > > If the browsers are doing their jobs correctly, you shouldn't need to > do anything at all. Construct peer connections to different peers and > send the same media to both. The link that has lower bandwidth will > be detected as such and the browser will reduce the send rate > accordingly; if it makes sense to do so, the resolution will be > reduced to avoid quality degrading too significantly. +1 martin And if the bottleneck is at A's upstream link they'll share roughly equally; but if for some reason you *want* B to get more of the bits, then something additional is needed. However, constraining the resolution is likely *not* the solution for that. It might be for "I know C is on a low-resolution device and doesn't care about more than 640x480"; in that case Harald's solution might have some use. Trying to outwit/stand-in-for the congestion control is a losing battle. Working with it to allocate bits is possible. -- Randell Jesup -- rjesup a t mozilla d o t com
Received on Saturday, 22 March 2014 07:07:41 UTC