Re: [RFC] VideoLAN Server Architecture For the Future
Bill Eldridge <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.video.videolan.vls.devel |
|---|---|
| Organization | Radio Free Asia |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Jean-Paul Saman wrote: > With the proposed module interface each module has certain capabilities > one of them is "seek" capability in a stream. If the input file is a > fifo then the stream control could set the seek capability to false for > that input file. This create the same effect as you need in this case. Yes, the issue isn't very complicated. > > THis might be replaced > > with a URL for ffmpeg, with a UDP socket input > > for vls (& UDP output for ffmpeg and/or ffserver), > > etc. > > > Could you elaborate on this? Well, the problem with the fifo is the blocking, especially if you have a server handling several things at once. Additionally, since the vls/vlc interaction is already UDP and ideally multicast, you could have a vls server act as a UDP/multicast client for another vls server, which makes it simply a repeater. If the other "vls server" happens to an ffserver instead, no problem. Either provide a URL that will specify the connection or a UDP port to start listening on. >> I have a bit of a hacked http.cpp interface >> for vls on http://techweb.rfa.org/staff/bill >> that only failed because of page buffering >> issues (it was cutting off after 512 bytes >> on the POST with some browsers but not with >> others) that can provide a different kind >> of control interface than the telnet.cpp >> one. >> > My idea was that a HTTP control interface (it should act like a little > webserver) would present a web page from which (after authentication): > - a user could start/stop a stream. > - a admin could alter/view current dynamic configuration > > Tell if I'm wrong but it seems that your solution partly solves the > admin case. In the next VLS version we should try to integrate and > improve your HTTP control interface. I see it is written like the telnet > interface (looked into http.c and http.h on your website). > Yes, my solution provides a small Web server interface that can be expanded to do whatever. I have several versions - one was a direct replacement for telnet.cpp, one created a new file http.cpp using STL classes and the last (buggiest) attempted to use the videolan STL replacements. (I'm not sure the latter is extrememely necessary, but having both STL & videolan classes is a bit chaotic). It implemented both the POST & GET methods and I think cookies. It basically just passed in the same commands as telnet.cpp used, so you could browse, start, stop, etc. I also wrote a quick Python cgi interface that just calls up the telnet socket and does the same stuff. -- Bill Eldridge Radio Free Asia [email protected] -- This is the vls-devel mailing-list, see http://www.videolan.org/vls-devel/ To unsubscribe, please read http://www.videolan.org/lists.html If you are in trouble, please contact <[email protected]>