Re: Some ideas on SVC support in WebRTC 1.0 (Take 2)

On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 22:30, Bernard Aboba <Bernard.Aboba@microsoft.com> wrote:
> [BA] There are other disadvantages as well:
>
>
> b. Inability to vary the spatial scaling to the same extent as is possible for simulcast today.  This could prevent spatial scalability (supported in VP9 and AV1) from substituting for spatial simulcast in some applications.
>
>
> c. Inability to support more sophisticated robustness schemes in the future.  The original design of RTCRtpRtxParameters and RTCRtpFecParameters (since removed from WebRTC 1.0) provided support for differential protection (e.g. applying RTX or FEC only to the base layer).


The problem of having each SVC layer defined in a
RTCRtpEncodingParameters entry (within encodings array) is that all
those entries belonging to the same stream must share LOT of fields
(such as pt, ssrc, etc). Super error prune IMHO.

-- 
Iñaki Baz Castillo
<ibc@aliax.net>

Received on Wednesday, 11 July 2018 00:27:27 UTC