[vlc] Re: Videoconference solutions

[Rubén Lagar]

Yes, but I am having 2seconds delay.

Maybe with 800-900ms would be ok, but I don't know what to change.



Albert Marti escribió:
>
>
> On 10/23/06, *Sigmund Augdal Helberg* <dnumgis at videolan.org 
> <mailto:dnumgis at videolan.org>> wrote:
>
>     On Mon, 2006-10-23 at 14:28 +0200, Rubén Lagar wrote:
>     > Hello,
>     >
>     > I am working for a French company, and we want to include a
>     > videoconference application in our web site (it is a collaborative
>     > site). For this, we have been testing VLC as solution. It works
>     fine, we
>     > get a better sound and video quality than Skype.
>     >
>     > The way we have done this is including a VLC activeX in the web page
>     > that shows the remote WebCam. For streaming we use a java applet
>     that
>     > runs VLC from command line, and stream the local webcam to the
>     remote
>     > site. We have solved also NAT issues, so anyone can
>     videoconference. As
>     > I say, it is really good quality, and video and audio are fluid
>     (we are
>     > using H263 and MP3 codifications).
>     >
>     > We have just one problem, that may cause that we drop VLC as
>     solution,
>     > and this would make me really upset. We can not remove a 2
>     seconds delay
>     > from the system, what makes conversation a pain. I have set to 0
>     almost
>     > every cache paremeter that I know, and the 2 seconds dealy is
>     still there.
>     I think 0 is an invalid value for most caching options, and vlc will
>     reset them to default if they are set to 0. I'd try to set the caching
>     options to something like 20.
>
>     Other options that may, or may not affect the delay:
>     --sout-ts-shaping and --sout-ts-dts-delay (if you use mux=ts)
>     --sout-ffmpeg-bframes and --sout-ffmpeg-keyint (if you use ffmpeg for
>     encoding (which I guess you do)). Try setting bframes to 0 and
>     keyint to
>     1 to get the lowest possible delay, then try increasing keyint and
>     see
>     if that improves quality without increasing delay (too much).
>
>     Regards
>
>     Sigmund
>     >
>     > I was wondering if any of the VLC developers could help me in
>     locating
>     > where is this delay located, to try to remove it.
>     >
>     > Thank you in advance,
>     > Rubén.
>     >
>
>     --
>     This is the vlc mailing-list, see http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
>     To unsubscribe, please read http://www.videolan.org/support/lists.html
>
>
>
> Rubén.
>
> my experience  tunning  vlc  using all possible parameters to drop the 
> latency is that you will always have at least around 800 - 900 ms. delay.
> I also think that it is an architecture-related issue.
>
> Regards
> Albert
>

-- 
This is the vlc mailing-list, see http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
To unsubscribe, please read http://www.videolan.org/support/lists.html