Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (9066)

• avformat : tls : drop support for OpenSSL < 1.1.0

  25 juin, par Marvin Scholz

  avformat : tls : drop support for OpenSSL < 1.1.0
  

  • [DH] libavformat/network.c
  • [DH] libavformat/tls_openssl.c

• FFMPEG re-broadcast/proxy MJPEG stream

  10 septembre 2022, par Ollie Pugh

  I have an MJPEG stream coming from an RPI on my home network and have an NGINX acting as a proxy on an EC2.

  &#xA;

  For the camera access the flow of stream to the user is the following

  &#xA;

  RPi -> mjpeg-proxy (running on EC2) -> NGINX (running on same EC2) -> user

  &#xA;

  the point of mjpeg-proxy is to reduce the load on the RPi and only have one stream to the Pi and allow the EC2 to distribute that one stream.

  &#xA;

  Now this work fine-ish from my PC (on same network as Pi) the streams work perfectly. But when it comes to my phone on roaming data, the stream is super choppy and the latency grows massively (this project needs minimal latency, like sub 300ms).

  &#xA;

  I can't understand why this would happen ? Because even when running of my local PC its going through the Proxy hosted in the cloud, so its not as if its an advantage to it being local ?

  &#xA;

  the stream is fine on another device, e.g. my laptop, but thats on the same network as the RPi. But like I said, it shouldn't makea difference as its going through a proxy !

  &#xA;

  I was wondering if using FFMPEG to re-stream the mjpeg stream would be beneficial as node is notoriously slow. But I don't really want to be writing my own mjpeg-proxy in C++ to speed this all up.

  &#xA;

  I have looked online for answers to FFMPEG MJPEG proxy and have been very unsuccesful

  &#xA;

• Videos storage and streaming [closed]

  12 juillet 2021, par Tomer

  I'll do my best to describe my thought here.

  &#xA;

  We came across a need to receive videos from users, store them and later on present those videos to different users upon request.&#xA;The argument is based on the idea that we can't serve one single file of the same size and quality to all clients. There must be consideration of the client's network quality.&#xA;One side claims that the best way to overcome this issue is by storing multiple versions of one file (360p, 480p, 720p etc..) and then based on the client's network quality we will estimate which file is best suited for his conditions. We shall estimate the client's network quality by testing the connection quality to the s3 servers storing our files.

  &#xA;

  Second party claims that storing one file of high quality is enough. Then, upon request by client we shall stream the file to the client in the suitable encoding and quality using a third party framework (from brief research, ffmpeg, Gstreamer. Its not established yet which and how, only consider the idea.).

  &#xA;

  Which is more acceptable in modern ways ? Are there any other ideas we haven't thought of ?

  &#xA;

  Couple of notes. Our backend is written in node, using aws-sdk for s3 and nest for api.

  &#xA;

  Thanks

  &#xA;