Date: Thu, 07 Mar 1996 12:45:21 -0800 From: "Amancio Hasty Jr." <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: Nate Williams <nate@sri.MT.net> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Act Now ! Message-ID: <199603072045.MAA14862@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 07 Mar 1996 13:38:22 MST." <199603072038.NAA02181@rocky.sri.MT.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>> Nate Williams said: > The MBONE is far and away *NOT* the only mechanism to do A/V. Most of > the folks doing commercial implementation require 30kpbs (I just did > research into this topic for work) to do Audio/Video/White-Board. > That's a *heck* of alot less than MBONE. The Mbone was designed to show > that A/V on WAN was possible, but it's certainly not the only way to do > A/V nor even the best implementation. And, it's not generally available > to anyone but to a select few, so things like Internet-Phone are *much* > more generally available and work. (I was suprised how well it works). Most ip multicast applications work in a point-to-point mode and they are really gated by their compression algorithm. Please Nate do a bit more reasearch for starters the algorithms reguired to deliver audio/video are not tied to the MBONE these are compression algorithms issues. The MBONE serves as a means to control the traffic flow of audio / video streams. Again please do a bit more reading if not lets take this discussion up on freebsd-multimedia mailing list since thats the appropiate forum to discuss the pros and cons of the MBONE. Amancio Regards, Amancio
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199603072045.MAA14862>