[vorbis-dev] RFC draft for Vorbis over RTP

[Ralph Giles]

On Thu, May 27, 2004 at 01:17:45AM +0200, Jack Moffitt wrote:

> > Seems a bit of a wash if there's a separate  header stream.
> 
> Not really.  If you are multicasting, the extra stream doesn't waste
> bandwidth unless people are pulling on it afaik.  So it's efficient.  On
> unicast, you might as well use a reliable transport since that will be
> faster.

My point was that if you have a separate channel anyway, only needing 
the codebooks once isn't that much of a simplification.

> Metadata happens in a separate channel.  I'm not sure whether this is
> something RTCP should be used for (probably not), or if we should just
> make a metadata rtp stream (is there not one of these already?).

If there's already something for metadata we should certainly use that.

> > I think allowing in-band comment packets
> > anywhere in the rtp stream makes a lot of sense. 
> 
> I disagree.  Then do we have comments in the video streams as well?  In
> teh speex streams?  Doing this once per stream regardless of all the
> differnet media you are sending makes sense.  Only in the trivial case
> of single media streams do you get any benefit at all.

Well, that's sort of how metadata works in Ogg Theora. We still don't 
have a metadata stream format because rdf-over-xml still mostly sucks.

I was proposing interleaved vorbis comment packets *as* something 
ridiculously simple. (this is technically a Vorbis I spec change.)

If we have to do our own, the quickest thing is a custom string-vector 
RDF encoding. Otherwise, there's annodex, RDF xml, and so on. If we're 
going to do this we should do it right.

 -r
--- >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.