--- Steven Elliott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > BUT one thing puzzles me. You would think Adobe > would not make such a big > deal about the quality of their streaming server for > two reasons. One is as > I have mentioned they don't have multicast or even > multicast managment API. > This immediately removes them from the serious, > enterprise tier and firmly > on the small corporate tier. I got the feeling that this was some kind of marketing quirk at Adobe. I think that wide support for several streaming formats is solid technologically, but Adobe wants to promote their FMS product. As far as Multicasting goes, this is really an issue that needs to be addressed in much wider venues. I don't see why Adobe would even bother to support Multicast when few ISPs carry multicast packets. So such a technology could only be utilized in a local area deployment scenario( corporate training materials and video conferencing perhaps ). The reasons for the lack of multicast support are partly political and I wont expound on them here unless explicitly requested. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IP_Multicast > > But more importantly is that FMS does not support > Quality of Service (QoS) > because Adobe uses its own proprietary (again) > streaming protocol, RTMP. > I'm pretty sure (99.9%) that Cisco, Brocade, et al > only provide QoS for > standards based streaming protocols, RTP/RTSP. So > it is more than slightly > oxymoronic that Adobe claims a higher level of > quality when they don't even > support QoS. > > have a great day! ... get some work done;) Steven, I appreciate your input here. Thanks. -jmz __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
