Re: [Sframe] using sframe with existing media networks

Justin Uberti <> Fri, 12 June 2020 16:33 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13FB63A089B for <>; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 09:33:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -17.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-17.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_MED=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, ENV_AND_HDR_SPF_MATCH=-0.5, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5, USER_IN_DEF_SPF_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xV8He9SrECg3 for <>; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 09:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::e34]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 56F403A09F1 for <>; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 09:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id 190so5621912vsr.9 for <>; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 09:33:05 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=w+yJ4kMUpylHTVIryXlDAYEvG3KCgBwTFoJiaZfs2B4=; b=Tqv1uEwasdRKTbjSqdn8jmEj95S/pkOsMuh5Oj9pLWc1JEGp1az04zDqjUHqlt+6vD 79bsfUQdQGd0x7i8F0rGF3fGYcGipCv6XLsa7U3EBzYOQZBDVmVggQyieN3hRwkEFOG9 XS2wdmVuvc+3ZmeX2sQ4BHezWe5GuqGvoUTcTAkkEbyU6VQ9D0XzoF4CbRmnx5TycIwX Bi26jArk5+J+5mTSmf88DzrM0YCM6ZxYbIQwBGenRwABRYXOCr+giN3ScYugVy4NvD8y Q1XW4TA9uJWligegeklPqSa8WtPVVk1G9aL3E2ApqVO9VXxPkXGGXQcndmUWsoVtoR9r jqrw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=w+yJ4kMUpylHTVIryXlDAYEvG3KCgBwTFoJiaZfs2B4=; b=iIzzcyTPaimRhywCX/2g7EAX4EHF4Pk2Cv80MVcGcJq/tfGe3vsZAM1LyqJkLfKrkb 29iwl7LhEeSpyNjsX01bi+y6Hkjw+UtCTMi9TWTlfZOsmuyINOsJq4ASBCE5Gy82aVig lb1hL4RsZmccJf6VCB/csarZd7LwDxe4HYtNy+lv6qt11uRbnGPZ3XXQrXuNb/ThfguH A4WC5FHJV0Vo3jhbuMI88AV544CWG9Dfzn720DLs+48Oh5WSwiaSGxSm9UMiTpNgwWXL EqhzlaHX8EenqZIQgjtnDvwcS29r61+CMUWxF1X70zMFt64jH2Erpl2+e+Q80gttCgzj 6EFQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533HZO90ru3uWvHzTzHGAx8KsL3Dm1dA/MDej+R4qHZAJdU6kLLw VKTEo8uHHku/814K1o88ovjRuiWIOm8nvc/ScTJ7iQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwSB3tpyPD4HLLalDtjw+Jl2NPIX+HFA45HHVi2V6A596qI8KEznN+SBLvLUgwwvxXCsnkHIGzZ6ripaQdL4ec=
X-Received: by 2002:a67:fb49:: with SMTP id e9mr11106322vsr.231.1591979583451; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 09:33:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <>
In-Reply-To: <>
From: Justin Uberti <>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 09:32:51 -0700
Message-ID: <>
To: "Pascal Buhler (pabuhler)" <>
Cc: "" <>, "Pascal Buhler (pabuhler)" <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000904c3805a7e5a1d1"
Archived-At: <>
Subject: Re: [Sframe] using sframe with existing media networks
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 16:33:07 -0000

On Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 1:03 AM Pascal Buhler (pabuhler) <pabuhler=> wrote:

> Hi,
> I had a couple of questions relating to the draft posted by Emad and
> sframe usage in general, not sure if it is best to post here, on github or
> a different forum.
> First I make the assumption that although sframe is a valid
> concept/standard on its own and that webrtc is not explicitly mentioned, I
> take it that it is in the context of webrtc and the insertable streams api
> that this was originally developed.
> I am looking at this from the prospective of a webrtc gateway, so there is
> no guarantee that there is a webrtc client at both ends.
> I see that the encrypted frame will be packetized with a generic RTP
> packetizer and use a generic RTP header extension, but no references to
> what these are or how one would signal/configure a client to use the
> generic packetize instead of a codec specific one. This is maybe not
> directly relayed to the sframe standard but relevant when using sframe in
> conjunction with other standards, for example SDP.

Yes, some form of signaling is definitely needed, perhaps some new option
in a m= section negotiating the use of a generic packetizer.

> Secondly I am interested in the Partial Decoding section, this seams to
> require that an entire frame is encoded as a single blob but there are many
> codecs that can encode parts of a frame as independent units, for example a
> single NAL that covers only a slice of a frame in H.264 or a single OBU
> that contains a tile in AV1. In these cases the units could still span many
> packets. Is it possible for sframe to work in these cases if one considers
> each of these unit to be a frame in the sframe concept? I am not familiar
> enough with the insertable streams api in webrtc to know how that works in
> the case of slices and tiles.

Yes, to enable this each independently decodable unit would be a 'frame'
for SFrame. This would include H.264 slices/AV1 OBUs, as well as individual
layers in a scalable coding context.