- From: Byron Campen <docfaraday@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2015 11:01:09 -0500
- To: public-webrtc@w3.org
On 8/14/15 1:19 AM, Stefan Håkansson LK wrote: > On 14/08/15 01:05, Adam Roach wrote: >> I've been involved in a number of recent conversations around simulcast >> for WebRTC, and a several implementors have indicated that it's an >> important feature for the initial release of WebRTC. >> >> As I understand the state of play: >> >> * Chrome has a form of simulcasting implemented using undocumented SDP >> mangling >> * Firefox has no simulcasting implemented, but will soon >> * The WebRTC 1.0 API has no simulcast-related controls whatsoever >> * The IETF MMUSIC working group is nearing completion on a document >> (draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-simulcast-01) that allows negotiation of >> simulcast in SDP >> >> >> I also understand and sympathize with the goal to stop adding any >> non-trivial modifications to the existing WebRTC spec, so that we can >> finally publish an initial version of the document. >> >> At the same time, the vast majority of the use cases that make sense for >> simulcast involve browsers talking to an MCU (or similar server), >> sending multiple encodings per track in the browser-to-MCU direction, >> but receiving only one encoding per track in the MCU-to-browser direction. >> >> This is interesting, because it means that we don't really require any >> controls that indicate the desire for a browser to /receive/ simulcast >> -- all we need is the ability to indicate a willingness to send it. At >> the same time, the MCU will know what resolutions (and other variations) >> it wants to receive, and can inform the browser of this information via SDP. > We already have a form of "poor man's" simulcast: create several tracks > that connect to the same source, attach them to individual RtpSender's, > and apply different constraints and different sender settings to them. > > In my personal opinion we should determine whether or not this would be > sufficient before adding new functionality. > > > There is a PR that would let you set a max bitrate, but what we really want is to be able to set a max resolution (or maybe a range) and framerate. We don't have this feature right now, even in a PR. On the flipside, we don't actually need the simple knob Adam described; as long as the MCU is willing to send a reoffer, and both ends support draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-simulcast, we're good to go with no additional w3c work. Lastly, any object-oriented simulcast API would need support for draft-ietf-mmusic-sdp-simulcast anyway, so this is a nice incremental step. Best regards, Byron Campen
Received on Friday, 14 August 2015 16:01:36 UTC