Ted Lemon <Ted.Lemon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> What I would like to see here is a camera on every microphone, on the
> presenter, on the chairs, and maybe one pointing back at the room, and
> someone or something picking which camera to send to the feed at any
> given time, plus a separate slide feed. The feed in each meeting room
yes, this is the only part of meetecho that is missing: multiple cameras.
I suggest that while we might need the switcher (that's the technical term
for the person who picks the camera feeds...) in the short-term, I suggest
that in the long term, that we should send all feeds, and the end users
pick. Perhaps one of our microphone/room management protocols (e.g UMPIRE),
could allow feedback from the remote people as to what the "best" feed is
at any time for the purpose of assembling a useful single-video feed.
> This is eminently doable in principle, but I suspect not sufficiently
> automatic at present for us to actually make it work. I suspect the
> meetecho people _could_ do this, but not at a cost that would make
> sense for an IETF meeting (yet).
It would be good to know what the capital and incremental costs might be, and
if a voluntary remote participation fee could fund it.
For meetings that I can not attend due to pure funding reasons, the
remote attendance fee might also be an issue. For meetings that I can not
attend due to logistical reasons (lack of childcare, conflict with family
event on edge weekend, lack of visa), a voluntary remote attendance fee is
way less than the airfare...
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature