[AG-TECH] Mapping IP addresses to Venues
olson at mcs.anl.gov
Thu Mar 21 16:29:33 CST 2002
>Why are audio and video sent on different IP address / port pairs for a
>single Virtual Venue? Why do they not share a single IP/Port
>address? Doesn t the payloadtype field in RTP allow you to effectively
>discern between audio and video streams?
they don't share a single IP address because the network routes traffic
based on IP address, not port. If we want to separate audio and video
traffic as presented to different computers (which I typically do), the
media need different ports.
Given that, they need different ports so that an application does not have
to sort through the data on the RTP session to demultiplex the media (the
RTP RFC makes the point that it is not recommended to combine streams in
>How are the IP/port allocated for the Virtual Venues?
The initial rooms had addresses allocated randomly (via the code from sdr);
the newer rooms are allocated sequentially out of ANL's GLOP space.
>For instance, we requested a static allocation of a block of multicast IP
>addresses from Internet2. Since multicast traffic is scoped purely on IP
>address and since the amount of traffic associated with a Virtual Venue
>would generally degrade any other multicast application sharing the same
>IP address but using a different port, it seems to me that each venue
>should have a dedicated single IP address.
At this point we're not viewing multicast addresses as a limited resource.
If need be in future, we can either dynamically allocate them on demand out
of a pool, or use SSM to effectively partition the space.
>If you have a dedicated single IP address per venue, is there anything
>wrong with following the RTP default ports of 5004 for RTP traffic and
>5005 for RTCP traffic?
Yes, if you wanted to subscribe to traffic from multiple rooms at a time
(say in a Voyager server, or in a monitoring application). You would not be
able to distinguish between the streams (based on the address anyway).
More information about the ag-tech