[foms] Proposal: adaptive streaming using open codecs

Frank Galligan fgalligan at google.com
Mon Nov 15 20:23:27 PST 2010

On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 6:13 PM, Chris Pearce <chris at pearce.org.nz> wrote:

> On 16/11/2010 6:48 a.m., Steve Lhomme wrote:
> > Doesn't it lead to more sync issues when the files you received are
> > not interleaved ?
> Yes, it's harder to manage non-interleaved streams over multiple
> connections.
> You are still going to have to manage multiple connections downloading
separate chunks.  Will managing non-interleaved streams be a lot harder?

And as Sylvia said we will also have separate video and text streams
eventually.  These would have to be interleaved too and our
stream combinations will grow even further.

> > One big pro for non interleaved is that switching between languages
> > (or regular/commentary track) is a lot easier and the only reasonable
> > way to handle it server side.
> The earlier consensus from most of the content providers was the non
> interleaved was easier to manage, particularly at large scale when you
> have a number of different bitrate streams, and a number of different
> audio tracks.
> Chris Pearce.
> _______________________________________________
> foms mailing list
> foms at lists.annodex.net
> http://lists.annodex.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/foms
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.annodex.net/cgi-bin/mailman/private/foms/attachments/20101115/67de1c98/attachment.htm 

More information about the foms mailing list