Get Started for FREE
Sign up with Facebook Sign up with X
I don't have a Facebook or a X account
 Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scoop.it!
We are pleased to announce the launch of our Adaptive Media Streaming over HTTP/2 trial. We are inviting you to participate in order to help us gather important data. The experimental HTTP version 2 protocol promises to improve the web browsing experience but what does it mean for HTTP-based media streaming technologies such as MPEG-DASH? 
No comment yet.
Sign up to comment
Scoop.it!
Streaming media may look like magic to the end user. However, for the content creator, there is a very tangible process that must be followed to make streaming video magically travel from the playout server to the viewer’s desktop. In other articles in this year’s Sourcebook, you’ll read about codecs and formats. But an equally important—and often misunderstood—delivery consideration is which protocol to choose to transport your video content over the internet. Three basic transport protocols are used for today’s streaming media delivery: HTTP, RTMP, and RTSP. Each protocol has its pros and cons and an appropriate streaming media application.
|
Scoop.it!
HTTP traffic has grown extensively driven by the immense growth of multimedia traffic. Nowadays, it could be seen as the protocol to deploy new services and applicationsand it is also heavily used by the industry, due to the fact that it provides advanced features for modern internet architectures.
It is a content centric protocol that decouples names from addresses through DNSIt provides caching elements and middle boxes as reverse and forward proxiesIt enables scalable and flexible content deployment with content distribution, already leveraged by Content Distribution Networks (CDN)
However, there is room for improvement as many services are still using HTTP/1.0 which was specified in May 1996, or are not using all the features of HTTP/1.1, such as persistent connections or pipelining. For example, already deployed HTTP streaming solutions such as Microsoft Smooth Streaming, Apple HTTP Live Streaming, and Adobe Dynamic Streaming do not use HTTP/1.1 pipelining with persistent connections, which could increase the streaming performance by up to 30 percent. Unfortunately, there are not many proxies that support HTTP/1.1 pipelining with persistent connections, due to the Head-of-Line (HoL) blocking problem where one pending response could possibly delay a range of other responses. The problem is that the proxy has to send in-order responses, which means that earlier arriving out-of-order responses will be blocked until the response that causes the HoL blocking arrives. Via DASH Industry Forum
Scoop.it!
New so-called reliable UDP solutions offer an alternative to TCP. But are they worth the time or money to implement?
Reliable UDP transports can offer the ideal situation for enterprise workflows -- one that has the benefit of high-capacity throughput, minimal overhead, and the highest possible "goodput" (a rarely used but useful term that refers to the part of the throughput that you can actually use for your application's data, excluding other overheads such as signaling). In the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) world, from which the IP standards arise, for nearly 30 years there has been considerable work in developing reliable data transfer protocols. RFC-908, dating from way back in 1984, is a good example.
|
