> > > * Multiple video inputs to Vic (which would remove the necessity > > of multi-machine nodes) > > as i understand the current ag architecture, it wouldn't really > be possible to take advantage of a multi-input vic since there > is a 1-to-1 mapping of "resources" (i.e., video capture devices) > to node services. if that is incorrect, i'd be interested in a > clarification. >
My understanding of this is that currently users usually have one machine that sends all the video streams for their node. In some situations this is also the audio and/or display machine. In order to send four video streams, this machine must have four transmitting vics. This means four windows open minimum which are just for transmitting. Each of these vics must additionally receive the all the video streams from the session, although these are muted. I am unsure of vic architecture, but I imagine muting does reduce the processor load somewhat. In any case, there are four windows, where there could only be one if vic could handle multiple camera inputs. Where the machine is also the display machine, there is also a vic for receiving input streams. This makes it more complicated for users as they have to work out which is the actual receiving window. I have often heard complaints that users cannot see any video, when actually they have just picked a vic with all muted streams. This becomes an even greater problem for unicast users, as the incoming video will only appear in one of these vics, which might be one of the ones that it muted. In summary, it would be useful to have a video tool that sends and receives all the video streams so that only one instance need be opened on any system, and that instance will cope in both a unicast and multicast situation. Andrew :) ============================================ Access Grid Support Centre, RSS Group, Manchester Computing, Kilburn Building, University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK Tel: +44(0)161-275 0685 Email: [email protected]
