IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal

"Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com> Sun, 10 October 2010 07:45 UTC

Return-Path: <abegen@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B955E3A67D6 for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:45:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.558
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.558 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.041, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BaIi3Ob1BKTi for <httpstreaming@core3.amsl.com>; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rtp-iport-1.cisco.com (rtp-iport-1.cisco.com [64.102.122.148]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AE96D3A6452 for <httpstreaming@ietf.org>; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:44:59 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: rtp-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAOQLsUytJV2b/2dsb2JhbACiKXGbdZtfhUgEhFKIeA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.57,309,1283731200"; d="scan'208";a="168803763"
Received: from rcdn-core-4.cisco.com ([173.37.93.155]) by rtp-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2010 07:46:08 +0000
Received: from xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com (xbh-sjc-231.cisco.com [128.107.191.100]) by rcdn-core-4.cisco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o9A7k7Sr026621; Sun, 10 Oct 2010 07:46:07 GMT
Received: from xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com ([171.70.151.169]) by xbh-sjc-231.amer.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675); Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:46:07 -0700
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 00:45:49 -0700
Message-ID: <04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540D5BF3A1@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com>
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim1dPg-TtQ6Jm0y+pKdvvLbU1Xq4Q4d7w+aMeG9@mail.gmail.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal
Thread-Index: ActoTje8GDcc7Y7rSD231p1u3Gy75gAAEWZA
References: <00df01cb5de2$2ac49730$4f548a0a@china.huawei.com><AANLkTimB3-=zWGnT=uq9Qcb-N8Pq+-RR0WMN12BZ9pr4@mail.gmail.com><03f501cb65a1$50699d70$f13cd850$%roni@huawei.com><B1C30D3B-6D5C-46B9-848D-3AE0C8B6058C@csperkins.org><9690AB8A-315E-4730-ABD8-78F4BB3E4CB6@nokia.com><04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540D5BF35F@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com><AANLkTimc=72t59x-N+xDzL+AYc_g8Noa0=H8cHYZsrFs@mail.gmail.com><04CAD96D4C5A3D48B1919248A8FE0D540D5BF3A0@xmb-sjc-215.amer.cisco.com> <AANLkTim1dPg-TtQ6Jm0y+pKdvvLbU1Xq4Q4d7w+aMeG9@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Ali C. Begen (abegen)" <abegen@cisco.com>
To: "Wenbo Zhu" <wenboz@google.com>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 10 Oct 2010 07:46:07.0571 (UTC) FILETIME=[32E42A30:01CB684F]
Cc: httpstreaming@ietf.org, Colin Perkins <csp@csperkins.org>
Subject: Re: [httpstreaming] Current Status and Our Goal
X-BeenThere: httpstreaming@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Network based HTTP Streaming discussion list <httpstreaming.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming>, <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/httpstreaming>
List-Post: <mailto:httpstreaming@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/httpstreaming>, <mailto:httpstreaming-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2010 07:45:00 -0000

> > Wanna give a specific example for "intermediaries"? I think you are referring to something besides the http caches.
> proxies.

What should a proxy support for streaming?
 
> >
> >> to offer direct support for streaming traffic, and different client
> >> platforms will also be able to improve end-user experience
> >> independently of vendor or media-protocol specific solutions.
> >
> > Sure but is not that all client implementation, which is mostly left for product differentiation?
> I am interested to find out whether existing implementations (that
> have successfully deployed HTTP-based streaming over internet) expose
> streaming resource via open protocols or API's?

There are source codes floating around (with different licenses of course). Have you looked at OSMF and OVP?
http://openvideoplayer.sourceforge.net/
http://opensource.adobe.com/wiki/display/osmf/Open+Source+Media+Framework 

-acbegen

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email