[Live-devel] I need to access OnDemandServerMediaSubsession::setSDPLinesFromRTPSink() from my derived class.

[Massimo Perrone]

Hello Ross and Steve,

I also would like to have support for RTP header extension.

A case for this could be the inclusion of absolute playback timestamp 
for recorded (i.e. non live) video frames, as reported in the Onvif 
streaming specs.

I don't know how "good" this case could be, nor if it involves any IETF 
standard.

Thanks,

Massimo Perrone


On 04/12/2019 23:04, Steve Ha wrote:
> Hi Ross,
>
> You are right when mention the complexity of RTP extension support.
> That is why I just simply ask you to put a little effort by allowing 
> outside of live555 to set the
> extension bit, and the rest is my part, of course I would do any way 
> out of scope of the
> library.
>
> Thank you for your adding 'protected' to my requested function,
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 12:29 AM Ross Finlayson <finlayson at live555.com 
> <mailto:finlayson at live555.com>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     > On Dec 4, 2019, at 10:05 PM, Steve Ha <steveha at u2sr.com
>     <mailto:steveha at u2sr.com>> wrote:
>     >
>     > Hi Ross,
>     >
>     > In order to avoid modifying live555 library directly I have some
>     needs:
>     >
>     > 1) I want to access to function 'setSDPLinesFromRTPSink' for
>     overridding sdpLines() of class OnDemandServerMediaSubsession:
>     > private:
>     > void setSDPLinesFromRTPSink(RTPSink* rtpSink, FramedSource*
>     inputSource, unsigned estBitrate);
>     >
>     > Can you make it accesible by the derived classes?
>
>     Yes.  This function is now “protected:” in the latest release of
>     the code (2019.12.04).
>
>
>     > 2) class MultiFramedRTPSink has various public functions for
>     setting RTP header's properties such as:
>     >    setMarkerBit, setTimestamp, setSpecialHeaderWord,
>     setFrameSpecificHeaderWord, etc.
>     >    But it does not any function to setHeaderExtensionBit.
>     >    Can you kindly support one more function to
>     setHeaderExtensionBit ?
>
>     No, because we currently don’t support RTP extension headers
>     (either sending or receiving).  (Adding a RTP extension header
>     involves a lot more than just setting a bit.)
>
>     I might consider supporting RTP extension headers in the future if
>     someone could make a good case for this (especially if it involves
>     support for an IETF standard).
>
>
>     Ross Finlayson
>     Live Networks, Inc.
>     http://www.live555.com/
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     live-devel mailing list
>     live-devel at lists.live555.com <mailto:live-devel at lists.live555.com>
>     http://lists.live555.com/mailman/listinfo/live-devel
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> live-devel mailing list
> live-devel at lists.live555.com
> http://lists.live555.com/mailman/listinfo/live-devel
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.live555.com/pipermail/live-devel/attachments/20191205/f68404b0/attachment.htm>