On Monday 25 November 2002 04:38 am, David Geoffrion wrote: > That's really cool. You don't have any bandwidth issues sending > uncompressed streams over ethernet? I'm not sure what the bandwidth > requirements are for an uncompressed A/V stream, have you tested that over > wireless?
hmm, well I thought the dumpstream was uncompressed, but it looks like I was wrong. I tried using dumpstream and socat to play a video over the network, and then tried ssh -X. The dumpstream method used about 50KB/s, and the ssh -X method used about 1.7MB/s (this was a small resolution asf which was really compressed). Of course that's just for video playback of an already compressed stream. For video capture, the stream would still be uncompressed. For 352x240, i think its about 6MB/s. I tried an SVCD once (480x480) and that was already saturating a 100Mbit pipe. However, ethernet channel bonding is cheap nowadays, and using three NICs people have achieved sustained bandwidth of ~260Mbit/s, which should be just barely enough to throw an uncompressed 720x480 (DVD resolution) stream over (that's probably the upper limit of what you can usefully capture off tv or cable). for wireless (~11Mbit/s, 1.375MB/s), the best you can hope for uncompressed would be about 160x120@24fps (~1.3MB/s). However, you could just dumpstream the audio, and have that compressed by a sepparate machine over wireless. But if you are just looking to be able to play a compressed video over wireless, NFS would use the same bandwidth as the dumpstream & socat method, and would be a lot easier. by the way, I have some other notes on neat things you can do with socat: http://jason.pepas.com/linux/notes/socat.txt -jason pepas _______________________________________________ Siglinux mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.utacm.org/mailman/listinfo/siglinux
