> Thanks for replying.
> I feel a little lost here, might need your a second explanation.
> We don´t want to add a second equipment
No, you wouldn’t ‘add’ equipment (or software). Instead, you would *replace*
your existing server (which takes media by ‘pushing’ (a complex and
non-standard mecha
Hi Ross,
Thanks for replying.
I feel a little lost here, might need your a second explanation.
We don´t want to add a second equipment, we want to push the signal directly
to the camera (uses linux system) to our external server ( evostream).
With ffmpeg we can used to do something like this:
ffm
> I have a camera module that uses LIVE555, and I would like to be able to PUSH
> the rtsp to a external server
No, we don’t support that model of communication (‘pushing’ media to a server),
because it’s excessively complex, and non-standard. Instead, we support a
(much simpler) model whereby
Thanks for the report.
I have now released a new version - 2015.10.12 - of the “LIVE555 Streaming
Media” software that should fix this problem.
Ross Finlayson
Live Networks, Inc.
http://www.live555.com/
___
live-devel mailing list
live-devel@lists.li
I have a camera module that uses LIVE555, and I would like to be able to
PUSH the rtsp to a external server no need any transcoding.
This camera module let me open: rtsp://u:p@ip:port/stream in VLC or record
to a local mount drive.
What I would like to add a simple script that send (PUSH) this RT
Hi Ross,
As per your suggestion i have compiled proxyserver in debugging mode, as
per the backtrace SEGFAULT is occurring at following line
* rtpGroupsock = createGroupsock(dummyAddr, serverRTPPort);*
following are the logs and backtrace from the gdb,
parseRTSPRequestString() succeeded,
Because this doesn’t involve the “LIVE555 Streaming Media” software, this
subject is off-topic for this mailing list.
Please continue this discussion on an ‘Axis’ mailing list (or via private
email).
Ross Finlayson
Live Networks, Inc.
http://www.live555.com/
___
In 5.60+, they changed their server to use gstreamer which tightened up on some
of the laxness in the previous (unnamed) server.
I don't think Axis were being "nice" as the main control URL was the same as
the describe URL. There was no special casing required.
It's just different now and whatev
