Changes between Version 2 and Version 3 of Ticket #6389, comment 25


Ignore:
Timestamp:
May 16, 2017, 8:50:31 AM (3 years ago)
Author:
winlin
Comment:

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • Ticket #6389, comment 25

    v2 v3  
    44@heleppkes This issue is not about the latency of FLV/RTMP, but it's the key point that why many users use RTMP/FLV. For some interactive live streaming, the protocol is very important, especially there's a CDN between encoder and player. So for H.265, it's also important to support RTMP/FLV in this situation.
    55
    6 Sure, I think you're right, I should push Adobe to upgrade the RTMP/FLV for H.265, IT IS the right way(But it's impossible for me to push Adobe, what do you think about it?). So, even if FFMPEG decided to reject this issue, I think it's reasonable.  It just upset some users who are making businesses in 1-3s interactive live streaming, which is an interesting and useful business.
     6Sure, I think you're right, I should push Adobe to upgrade the RTMP/FLV for H.265, IT IS the right way(But it's impossible for me to push Adobe, what do you think about it?). So, even if FFMPEG decided to reject this issue, I think it's reasonable.  It just upset some users who are making businesses in 1-3s interactive live streaming, which is interesting and useful.
    77
    88FFMPEG, the GOD of live streaming industry, please help us~