Talk:Real-Time Media Flow Protocol

New Protocol from Adobe RTMFP( Real Time Media Flow Protocol )

Sunil gupta20801 (talk) 23:09, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Added some internal links Mpr312 (talk) 16:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Proposal: "Source code" section

This article is about a network transport protocol similar to QUIC, TCP, or SCTP. The QUIC article includes a "Source code" section with a table linking to 16 (as of this writing) open source implementations of the protocol. I propose a similar section and table for this article.

This article currently has an "External links" section linking to pages, blogs, and software about or implementing RTMFP. I attempted to add a link to a new implementation (of which I am the author), but just that link was removed as "inappropriate" (with which I disagree), though I accept it was in fact a "conflict of interest".

Unfortunately I am the co-creator of the subject of this article, author of its public documentation (RFC 7016 and RFC 7425), as well as the author of an open source implementation of it, so it is probably a conflict of interest for me to make any edits to this article. Therefore, if a "Source code" section and table is added, I propose and request an independent addition of my implementation to that table, as it is relevant and appropriate on its face: Implementation "zenomt/rtmfp-cpp", License "MIT License", Language "C++", Description "A cross-platform implementation of RFC 7016 and RFC 7425 by RTMFP's co-creator." Zenomt (talk) 22:24, 18 September 2021 (UTC)

I'm not opposed to an Implementations section. GeneralNotability may have some strong feelings about it though. ~Kvng (talk) 12:39, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Kvng, I'm of the opinion that linking to implementations generally falls afoul of WP:ELNO (in particular, I think it violates the spirit of #14) and that sort of list tends to turn into a spam magnet. I'm fine with linking an official reference implementation, and if individual implementations have their own articles I'm fine with linking to those. GeneralNotability (talk) 12:44, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

GeneralNotability, In case this has any bearing, I don't think it should be a list of external links. It should be a list or table of implementations with references pointing to supporting information about each implementation. If this attracts enough entries to cause an WP:UNDUE issue, it can be split off into List of Real-Time Media Flow Protocol implementations. ~Kvng (talk) 12:53, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Kvng, I'm personally not a fan of those sorts of lists/tables for the same reason, though I don't think my views align with the community on that one. GeneralNotability (talk) 23:46, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

The "official implementation" exists in Adobe Flash Player, Adobe AIR, and Adobe Media Server. Those products only provide high-level API access to the higher layers of the protocol suite. The closest thing to a reference implementation of the base transport protocol (RFC 7016) is my implementation referenced above (since I am the co-creator of the protocol and author of its technical specifications); however, I am no longer associated with Adobe and my implementation is a new and independent one, so it is not an "official" reference implementation (and it is different from the implementation inside those Adobe products). However, as the base transport protocol is open and publicly specified in an IETF RFC, having multiple independent implementations is considered desirable. And like in the QUIC article, I believe it is appropriate and desirable to provide links to implementations in this article. Zenomt (talk) 00:35, 22 September 2021 (UTC)