Hi, > nothing in FFmpeg is (by itself) a videoconferencing software.
Ah, right thank you, I couldn’t think of the word “videoconferencing,” was on the tip of my tongue (or fingers). It makes it easier to explain the context as an analogy to regular telephone, which happens to be described by, H.324. The H.3xx series all describe how audiovisual terminals network with each other. H.323 describes the videoconferencing equivalent of the PSTN for telephones. It specifies how addresses are resolved to route the call, the signaling protocol used to set up the connection, etc. It doesn’t specify how the media is packaged, it describes how terminals negotiate those details. > I thought H.323 was a packaging a bit like HLS might be, or Fragmented > MP4. The hope is to be able to integrate a camera system generating H.264 > into Zoom and other web-conferencing systems which require H.323 to work. So you have a camera system with built in H.264. ffmpeg could compress/transcode the required audio and stream RTP. Everything else is beyond ffmpeg. H.323 configuration commands show up in stuff like branch routers with application/service integration, dedicated conferencing gateways, and more recently, software implementations on general servers. > So what you're saying is I'd need to generate my own communications handler > that manages the H.323 traffic, and passing the H.264 stream to that > handler to pass on to the endpoint? Not that you need to build one yourself, that would be a pretty big project, but yes, a video stream is only a small part of the system. You mentioned Zoom, that’s a possible vendor that could provide the “everything else”. Tandberg (Cisco) is also a big name. Regards, Ted Park _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-user mailing list [email protected] https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-user To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email [email protected] with subject "unsubscribe".
