Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 18:14:30 -0700 From: Kevin Oberman <kob6558@gmail.com> To: Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> Cc: Doug Barton <dougb@freebsd.org>, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, FreeBSD Hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, Arnaud Lacombe <lacombar@gmail.com> Subject: Re: On cooperative work [Was: Re: newbus' ivar's limitation..] Message-ID: <CAN6yY1uM8LoihRwXPFqJfMT%2B36aPeHOqLyaadUYVr5VvzkA3gw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <501B1D3A.6080501@freebsd.org> References: <CACqU3MUh1XPScRHNc-ivOYLmbG0_UqpwBNWeoPA84uSOESH_bg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-FndCHxpTfc%2Bb5zgiX2NheaQN1LcJXBRubef4_GAYCy_pb2g@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MWo=ieaduuwZDF6SfzUUS5y1qzP5e2Ddg6Aphnz_O2PJw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-FndCDpD3rnQFwiOSGofP9cPCxC5Zo%2BPLfxALY8pnE=2HQMA@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MW2JEtDK0Ngdf_Br6D%2BVvdU1B9LmN0fm0F9=bG0f2iW4Q@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmomhHxG8t9Sw7de%2BzUnbz0O5GSY4ifpHFtCb9JS_zS0rBA@mail.gmail.com> <CACqU3MUKGcy8rNz0FcZLVat49BmRLD3hVKX%2BOXxkzwRDugKtAw@mail.gmail.com> <612DA8A3-121E-4E72-9E5B-F3CBA9DEB7F7@bsdimp.com> <CACqU3MU-WyNFf5UZGx15m_HWBx_6W272qkfqHHJ8G7v%2BJCK2Sw@mail.gmail.com> <FAE07410-CA99-4061-856F-799DB9D225BE@bsdimp.com> <501A0258.4010101@FreeBSD.org> <CAN6yY1svYnrkbtW7ts4TF-3E0CoPY_YxbOLMmGJv6RzSUwbqEQ@mail.gmail.com> <45815622-3CE2-42E3-B118-702AA70C7E4C@samsco.org> <CCDCF5F5-B408-4D56-B0F9-910F029D8587@gmail.com> <501AB08E.8020008@FreeBSD.org> <501B1D3A.6080501@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Aug 2, 2012 at 5:37 PM, Julian Elischer <julian@freebsd.org> wrote: > On 8/2/12 9:53 AM, Doug Barton wrote: >> >> On 08/02/2012 09:44, Garrett Cooper wrote: >>> >>> The "Watson/Losh connection" worked really well in BSDCan 2010 :). >> >> I wasn't going to mention that, since I didn't want to tell tales out of >> school. But the fact that remote participation actually was provided for >> "the right people," even though I was told repeatedly that it wasn't >> possible, actually highlights a big part of the problem. > > bandwidth was limited and a single 1:1 skype connection was all we really > could do. > > I did broadcast sessions a few years ago using the apple quicktime server > but it was a lot of work and I think one person looked at part of one > session. > >> Doug First, too many of these posts assume way too much. I don't think anyone should be thinking of any sort of what is commonly called "teleconferencing". That would be nice, but is far more complex and expensive, both in bandwidth and equipment, then should be considered as a starting point. I suggest the starting point is a webpage with a link to the slides being presented and a simple audio stream. This is trivially possible with a FreeBSD system and open-source software. A bandwidth of only about 70kbps would be needed. Less with reasonable codec choice. Several streams could be broadcast via a single, unicast stream to a well connected server which woild then stream to end users It might be augmented with jabber other open IM technology with someone at the meeting if procedures for this could be agreed to. (Some vetting is desirable, but will result in calls of censorship.) For small rooms, microphones are fairly easy to handle and one-way streams don't require echo cancellation. As costs for video come down, that might be something to think about some day, but is not required to allow remote "attendance". Of course, unless this is publicized, no one will come (which eliminates any technical issues). :-) -- R. Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer E-mail: kob6558@gmail.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAN6yY1uM8LoihRwXPFqJfMT%2B36aPeHOqLyaadUYVr5VvzkA3gw>