On Mon, 2006-01-09 at 11:16 -0300, Edgard Lima wrote:
Hi MikeS and deadchip,
could you answer with the Joe's questions?
You didn't include Joe's email address, so I'm just responding to you:
you should feel free to forward this email to him.
thanks,
Edgard
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 09:45:32AM -0300, Edgard Lima wrote:
>> Im a gstreamer developer and we have just developed a neon-http-src
>> plugin to allow us get http data. libneon has been choose because it
>> fits all requirements we need, but one, we cant get icecast/shoutcast
>> (http://207.200.96.232:8006) data.
>>
>> And today it is very important to us because most of servers out there
>> streaming Ogg and MP3 is icecast/shoutcast.
>>
>> Is it possible to change(/add a functionatily to) libneon (I mean, a
>> small change like a flag o anything else you consider a better design)
>> in order to allow responses with no http header like in
>> http://207.200.96.232:8006?
>
>
It depends; what other differences are there between the IceCast
(ShoutCast?) protocol and HTTP? Is it just the status-line? (if so,
one might ask why the heck they made the protocol arbitrarily
incompatible with HTTP). Is there a spec for this protocol somewhere
which I can read?
Hi Joe,
Edgard asked me to reply to your email, so here goes...
(Aside: as well as being a gstreamer developer, I'm one of the icecast
developers)
Icecast's protocol is mostly HTTP-compatible. For 'source
clients' (those that provide data for icecast to stream), due to
historical error, there's a small extension (we use an extension method
called 'SOURCE' which should probably just be 'PUT', since it's
semantically the same), but since Edgard was asking solely about
listening clients, I won't go into details there.
For a normal listening client, it's 100% HTTP (with some non-standard
headers, but the syntax of those is normal, so that's ok).
I believe shoutcast's client protocol is, as you describe, different
from HTTP only in the status line. One might indeed ask why they made
the protocol arbitrarily incompatible, but I doubt you'd get an answer
from them. Shoutcast's network protocol design is utterly bizarre in
other ways too... I don't believe they ever documented any of it.
So, the rest of your email, concerning API additions/etc, makes sense if
you do s/icecast/shoutcast/ throughout.
Mike
_______________________________________________
neon mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.webdav.org/mailman/listinfo/neon
