[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] IVF demuxer
Fri May 21 15:52:04 CEST 2010
On 05/21/2010 01:32 PM, John Koleszar wrote:
> That's about right. In all seriousness, I'd be interested moving to
> use a more standard container of similar complexity for providing
> basic packet framing and timestamping. I thought about (ab)using RTP,
> but never had the time to look into it very far and given the limited
> use/scope of ivf, there weren't any tangible advantages at the time.
> If you have any suggestions, I'd be interested.
rtp would be interesting if you plan to use vp8 for actual streaming.
Nowadays rtp is usually delivered mostly through tcp to overcome
nat/proxy (and sctp and dccp are bare experiments...) so the
fragmentation rules could be somehow disregarded.
More information about the ffmpeg-devel