Dear Team,
Now we are want to build a proxy server to proxy many camera. Here we found
that your proxy using one environment to distribute contents, that means it is
using one thread for receiving and sending content. So my question is can we
build a proxy using “Environment Pool” to use mul
The asynchronous, event-driven architecture of LIVE555-based applications means
that you don’t need multiple threads to proxy multiple cameras. In fact, our
existing “LIVE555 Proxy Server” application, described at
http://live555.com/proxyServer/
already allows you to do this. Simply en
Thank Ross,
But it seem you misunderstood my idea, I want to create multiple thread to
reduce latency in receiving and sending content, for example, I want to proxy
60 cameras, my server has 4 cores so I want split 15 cameras in one thread aka
environment, so here I have an environment pool tha
> But it seem you misunderstood my idea
No I didn’t.
> , I want to create multiple thread to reduce latency in receiving and sending
> content, for example, I want to proxy 60 cameras, my server has 4 cores so I
> want split 15 cameras in one thread aka environment, so here I have an
> enviro
Thanks Warren. Unfortunately my scope of control ends at my application
boundary. This application is video distribution of live camera feeds
(surveillance system) and frequently our clients do not want us mucking around
with their system settings. Clearly I *could* do what has been suggested fr
Please everybody - when replying to a mailing list ‘Digest’, (1) fix the
“Subject:” line, and (2) trim your post to not quote excessive text. This is
basic mailing list ‘netiquette’.
One other thing you could try is - in your “main()” program, do
#include
and then, near the beginning
On Dec 6, 2016, at 11:55 AM, Weber, Patrick
wrote:
>
> Clearly I *could* do what has been suggested from within my application (the
> top layer is C#/.NET, so the System.Web assembly has everything needed)
Not according to this SO answer:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/7333764/
You ma
Haven't tried this, so grain of salt.
The protected RTSPServer constructor has a parameter for the socket FD.
I think you could first, subclass the RTSPServer class so you can pass in your
own socket fd.
Using system calls w/ C++ or using .NET, initialize your own socket bound to
the NIC you p
(last reply got rejected, so trying again w/o trimming response)
Haven't tried this, so grain of salt.
The protected RTSPServer constructor has a parameter for the socket FD.
I think you could first, subclass the RTSPServer class so you can pass in your
own socket fd.
Using system calls w/ C++
Having read all the emails, I see that the Live555 design uses the interface
which supports a multicast router. I don't see anything wrong with the
request below from Patrick. If a node is a router, a router supports many
interfaces. Each interface can independently support multicast routing.
On Dec 6, 2016, at 3:15 PM, Jeremiah Morrill
wrote:
>
> The protected RTSPServer constructor has a parameter for the socket FD.
RTSP is a TCP-based protocol. Messing about with its socket will have no
effect on how the *UDP* multicast packets go out.
There is such a thing as RTP over TCP, b
11 matches
Mail list logo
