Re: [AVT] RFC 2733 vs 3119

[Ross Finlayson <finlayson at live.com>]

> as to lost packet recovery of real-time MP3 transmission, which one, among 
> RFC 2733 (FEC) and RFC 3119 (ADU), is more efficient, taking into 
> consideration the tradeoff of redundancy and recovery ability?

Note that RFC 3119 (the ADU-based RTP payload format for MP3) does not add 
any redundancy.  It merely rearranges the MP3 frame data so that each 
resulting ADU is self-contained (so that if it's lost, all other received 
data will still be completely usable).

> also, can RFC 2733 and 3119 be implemented together?

I believe that that would work well (although I haven't investigated this 
in detail).

        Ross (the author of RFC 3119).



_______________________________________________
Audio/Video Transport Working Group
avt at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/avt