Iñaki Baz Castillo
Iñaki Baz Castillo
What about if we allow packets with higher layers be forwarded only if their PID value is between S_PID - 10 and S_PID being S_PID the PID of the packet...
>> [PID: 6, TID: 1] -> current temporal layer is set to 1 and the packet it's forwarded > If this is packet can be used to change to temporal...
Idea: let old packets with temporal layer greater than current temporal layer pass to the consuming endpoint UNTIL a keyframe (for the target spatial layer) is sent to it. Once...
> Yep, that would make it. > > EDIT: Indeed I can't see at the moment how it would do it. Can you expose it within a flow in order...
> Example: Given a steady state: no layer switching, current TL is 0, we filter out packets with TID > 0. WIth this PR this could happen: > > Sender...
@ggarber not sure if I follow, there is no nice approach here but just 2 proposals with their own drawbacks: 1. Don't change anything and let old packets with higher...
> I was suggesting to go with Option 2. > The PLIs in the receiver side are not triggered based on packet loss but on not having decodeable frames for...
> I didn't check the implementation but the concept of the PR is good imo, yes. Requires further testing. Not sure yet whether it addresses the intended issue.
> Therefore, I suggest to make maxInterval, minInterval, maxCount optional configuration items. What do you mean with "maxInterval" and "minInterval"? It doesn't make sense. We already have a customizable "interval"...
Do you feel brave to write a PR implementing this? That mathematics is too hard for me and honestly I don't think we will be able to spend too much...