I'm making some progress on my long promised video call for VUC. In
order to firm up the plans we need to arrive at a list of SIP end-
points that might join the video portion of the call. So I need to ask
the group a couple questions....
1. Would you be interested in joining the video conference?
2. If yes, what sort of end-point do you have? Please describe in some
detail.
This will end up being a lot like the very first G.722 conference that
we did using ZipDX. We'll have two parallel conferences, one audio
+video, the other just audio.
There will be a limited number of "seats" in the video conference. We
need to ensure that anyone who wants to join that part of the call has
the right local resources to make it happen.
I suspect that preference will be shown to those who have hardware end-
points that are known acceptable by the video conference provider.
Beyond that some soft clients may be acceptable, presuming that you
also have the camera and necessary bandwidth.
I'm hoping that we can do this up right in HD, at 720p, which means
about 1.2 Mbps in each direction.
The video conference provider tells me that they provide a web-based
one-way video stream accessible to anyone who is not on the video conf
bridge. In that way everyone gets to see, even if only a handful get
to be seen.
No date has been selected as yet. We'll do that once we have a grasp
of the diversity of end-points that we'll be using.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:21 PM, mgraves <mgra...@mstvp.com> wrote: > Hello All,
> I'm making some progress on my long promised video call for VUC. In > order to firm up the plans we need to arrive at a list of SIP end- > points that might join the video portion of the call. So I need to ask > the group a couple questions....
> 1. Would you be interested in joining the video conference?
> 2. If yes, what sort of end-point do you have? Please describe in some > detail.
> This will end up being a lot like the very first G.722 conference that > we did using ZipDX. We'll have two parallel conferences, one audio > +video, the other just audio.
> There will be a limited number of "seats" in the video conference. We > need to ensure that anyone who wants to join that part of the call has > the right local resources to make it happen.
> I suspect that preference will be shown to those who have hardware end- > points that are known acceptable by the video conference provider. > Beyond that some soft clients may be acceptable, presuming that you > also have the camera and necessary bandwidth.
> I'm hoping that we can do this up right in HD, at 720p, which means > about 1.2 Mbps in each direction.
> The video conference provider tells me that they provide a web-based > one-way video stream accessible to anyone who is not on the video conf > bridge. In that way everyone gets to see, even if only a handful get > to be seen.
> No date has been selected as yet. We'll do that once we have a grasp > of the diversity of end-points that we'll be using.
On Tue, Jun 29, 2010 at 7:21 PM, mgraves <mgra...@mstvp.com> wrote: > Hello All,
> I'm making some progress on my long promised video call for VUC. In > order to firm up the plans we need to arrive at a list of SIP end- > points that might join the video portion of the call. So I need to ask > the group a couple questions....
> 1. Would you be interested in joining the video conference?
> 2. If yes, what sort of end-point do you have? Please describe in some > detail.
> This will end up being a lot like the very first G.722 conference that > we did using ZipDX. We'll have two parallel conferences, one audio > +video, the other just audio.
> There will be a limited number of "seats" in the video conference. We > need to ensure that anyone who wants to join that part of the call has > the right local resources to make it happen.
> I suspect that preference will be shown to those who have hardware end- > points that are known acceptable by the video conference provider. > Beyond that some soft clients may be acceptable, presuming that you > also have the camera and necessary bandwidth.
> I'm hoping that we can do this up right in HD, at 720p, which means > about 1.2 Mbps in each direction.
> The video conference provider tells me that they provide a web-based > one-way video stream accessible to anyone who is not on the video conf > bridge. In that way everyone gets to see, even if only a handful get > to be seen.
> No date has been selected as yet. We'll do that once we have a grasp > of the diversity of end-points that we'll be using.
I would use a softphone for linux. Most likely "Ekiga" but once we
have a date for the video call I'll investigate some more on what's
out there. I would also use that chance to try SIPdroid on my Android
phone. Since that doesn't have a front facing camera though I'll do it
in front of a mirror :)
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Maxim <ma...@swill.org> wrote: > I would use a softphone for linux. Most likely "Ekiga" but once we > have a date for the video call I'll investigate some more on what's > out there. I would also use that chance to try SIPdroid on my Android > phone. Since that doesn't have a front facing camera though I'll do it > in front of a mirror :)
> I'm making some progress on my long promised video call for VUC. In > order to firm up the plans we need to arrive at a list of SIP end- > points that might join the video portion of the call. So I need to ask > the group a couple questions....
> 1. Would you be interested in joining the video conference?
> 2. If yes, what sort of end-point do you have? Please describe in some > detail.
> This will end up being a lot like the very first G.722 conference that > we did using ZipDX. We'll have two parallel conferences, one audio > +video, the other just audio.
> There will be a limited number of "seats" in the video conference. We > need to ensure that anyone who wants to join that part of the call has > the right local resources to make it happen.
> I suspect that preference will be shown to those who have hardware end- > points that are known acceptable by the video conference provider. > Beyond that some soft clients may be acceptable, presuming that you > also have the camera and necessary bandwidth.
> I'm hoping that we can do this up right in HD, at 720p, which means > about 1.2 Mbps in each direction.
> The video conference provider tells me that they provide a web-based > one-way video stream accessible to anyone who is not on the video conf > bridge. In that way everyone gets to see, even if only a handful get > to be seen.
> No date has been selected as yet. We'll do that once we have a grasp > of the diversity of end-points that we'll be using.
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 5:46 PM, Randy R <randulo2...@gmail.com> wrote: > Everyone knows linux can't do video!
> On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 12:51 PM, Maxim <ma...@swill.org> wrote: > > I would use a softphone for linux. Most likely "Ekiga" but once we > > have a date for the video call I'll investigate some more on what's > > out there. I would also use that chance to try SIPdroid on my Android > > phone. Since that doesn't have a front facing camera though I'll do it > > in front of a mirror :)
On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 3:02 PM, Enrique Mora <enrique.m...@gmail.com> wrote: > This sounds like an interesting initiative.
> I would certainly join in.
> I have LifeSize Express 220 and LifeSize Passport endpoints as well as some > software endpoints (lifesize, polycom, mirial, etc.) > LifeSize Express 220 is Full HD (1080p) and Passport is 720p.
> I may be able to reserve ports on a Radvision MCU and/or a Codian MCU
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 2:21 AM, mgraves <mgra...@mstvp.com> wrote:
>> Hello All,
>> I'm making some progress on my long promised video call for VUC. In >> order to firm up the plans we need to arrive at a list of SIP end- >> points that might join the video portion of the call. So I need to ask >> the group a couple questions....
>> 1. Would you be interested in joining the video conference?
>> 2. If yes, what sort of end-point do you have? Please describe in some >> detail.
>> This will end up being a lot like the very first G.722 conference that >> we did using ZipDX. We'll have two parallel conferences, one audio >> +video, the other just audio.
>> There will be a limited number of "seats" in the video conference. We >> need to ensure that anyone who wants to join that part of the call has >> the right local resources to make it happen.
>> I suspect that preference will be shown to those who have hardware end- >> points that are known acceptable by the video conference provider. >> Beyond that some soft clients may be acceptable, presuming that you >> also have the camera and necessary bandwidth.
>> I'm hoping that we can do this up right in HD, at 720p, which means >> about 1.2 Mbps in each direction.
>> The video conference provider tells me that they provide a web-based >> one-way video stream accessible to anyone who is not on the video conf >> bridge. In that way everyone gets to see, even if only a handful get >> to be seen.
>> No date has been selected as yet. We'll do that once we have a grasp >> of the diversity of end-points that we'll be using.
I have LifeSize Express 220 and LifeSize Passport endpoints as well as some software endpoints (lifesize, polycom, mirial, etc.) LifeSize Express 220 is Full HD (1080p) and Passport is 720p.
I may be able to reserve ports on a Radvision MCU and/or a Codian MCU
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 2:21 AM, mgraves <mgra...@mstvp.com> wrote: > Hello All,
> I'm making some progress on my long promised video call for VUC. In > order to firm up the plans we need to arrive at a list of SIP end- > points that might join the video portion of the call. So I need to ask > the group a couple questions....
> 1. Would you be interested in joining the video conference?
> 2. If yes, what sort of end-point do you have? Please describe in some > detail.
> This will end up being a lot like the very first G.722 conference that > we did using ZipDX. We'll have two parallel conferences, one audio > +video, the other just audio.
> There will be a limited number of "seats" in the video conference. We > need to ensure that anyone who wants to join that part of the call has > the right local resources to make it happen.
> I suspect that preference will be shown to those who have hardware end- > points that are known acceptable by the video conference provider. > Beyond that some soft clients may be acceptable, presuming that you > also have the camera and necessary bandwidth.
> I'm hoping that we can do this up right in HD, at 720p, which means > about 1.2 Mbps in each direction.
> The video conference provider tells me that they provide a web-based > one-way video stream accessible to anyone who is not on the video conf > bridge. In that way everyone gets to see, even if only a handful get > to be seen.
> No date has been selected as yet. We'll do that once we have a grasp > of the diversity of end-points that we'll be using.
|
