[vorbis-dev] Vorbis-RTP situation

[philkerr at elec.gla.ac.uk]

Since the last update of the Vorbis-RTP draft the project I'm working on has
shifted its focus towards MS DRM based content and so the time to build a
Vorbis-RTP reference implementation has all but dried up :(  

However at the last AVT meeting I met with an implementator of the draft who
said apart from a few nits it performed to spec.  One of the biggest changes
over earlier versions has been the delivery of the codebooks with both RTCP and
SDP methods now available, testing these out to determine if they do work over a
wide range of networking environments would be a good place to start.  

Jack's suggestions for possible test frameworks are good choices.  I started to
prototype the RTP stack in GNU/ccRTP but a diverse range of implementation
technologies is good.

So, if you are interested in helping with the draft, or are interested in
writing implementations based on it, please get in touch.  

Regards

<p>Phil

<p><p>Quoting Jack Moffitt <jack at xiph.org>:

> > 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.
> 
> 
> 
> !DSPAM:3f89a9c72250638131997!
> 
> 
> 

<p><p><p>-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
--- >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.