[vorbis-dev] Vorbis-RTP situation

[Jack Moffitt]

> Why isn't it better to do a spec for ogg over RTP, rather than Vorbis
> over RTP?  Why can't there just be one way to put ogg packets into RTP
> packets, rather than write a separate RFC for each codec that someone
> wants to stream over RTP?

Because RTP and Ogg share very similar jobs.  They are both for
sequencing, transport, and stream management.  It makes sense to get rid
of Ogg in this context and let RTP take over.

That said, there are really only a small number of issues with the
draft.  Mostly there is the issue that Vorbis has no fixed codebooks,
which some at the IETF see as a disadvantage, but really is quite a big
strength of Vorbis.  Since they didn't think about this possibility way
back when, some feel (Ross Finlayson in particular) that our way is
clearly wrong.

In any case, once we decide/create some way to transport codebooks
reliable for some RTP stream, the draft is essentially done as I
understand it.  There may be some other minor issues, but I believe this
is the only big one.

As for implementations, Icecast is not the appropriate testbed.  It is
designed around reliable TCP transmission, and would probably have to
have it's core redesigned to accomodate UDP or RTP.  Note that much of
the current icecast 2 server was written with this in mind (a core
redesign) and would survive such a transition.  So all the utility
pieces should be directly applicable.  

I think the way to test RTP Vorbis is to use something like Twisted
Python to implement it, or to get it working inside the Helix system.

jack.
--- >8 ----
List archives:  http://www.xiph.org/archives/
Ogg project homepage: http://www.xiph.org/ogg/
To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to 'vorbis-dev-request at xiph.org'
containing only the word 'unsubscribe' in the body.  No subject is needed.
Unsubscribe messages sent to the list will be ignored/filtered.