Has anyone a suggestion for this situation?

We broadcast live from several pressboxes around the area. To get internet, we use point to point radios that are capable of about 30mbps, that point back to the main server of the LAN- in other words- all LAN traffic must travel back to the main server, and from the pressbox it travels over the radios.

BUT - if we want to use NDI with vMIX in the pressbox for graphics and monitoring, it will send all that traffic down the radio connection, back to the main server.

What is the best way to limit NDI to a LAN within our pressbox, and only use the radio connection for our streaming send to youtube?

Would it work to connect to the LAN first and establish the NDI connection then turn on the radios for the stream?

Worked for me in my studio with two different LAN's: NDI on one and internet on the other.

- Tom

Thanks for the reply guys... I'll explain further-


The setup is this -- the DHCP server and DNS servers and all LAN routing happens in the main building.

In our pressbox, we have cisco radios that provide a wireless link to the LAN (ie main building).

The setup in the pressbox- -- VMIX, graphics, monitoring via laptop NDI are all attached to an unmanaged switch, which in turn is connected to the radio link to the LAN.

I havent tested this yet, but would assume all traffic in the pressbox would go out on the radios, to the LAN where it is then routed to the appropriate IP address which is of course back over the radio to the pressbox. So there is the potential for a huge amount of bandwidth over this link with 3 NDI connections, and since I only get about 25 mbps up to the internet (obviously LAN would be faster), I want to keep traffic off of the radio connection.

I was thinking the best solution may be to purchase a router and setup different routing rules, but just flying blind at the moment. I am fairly convinced that the unmanaged switch will behave the way ive described, but not knowing much about multicast NDI I am really just guessing at behavior.

Any thoughts are appreciated!

NDI video isn't multicast. The discovery protocol is, but that is very low bandwidth. All NDI video/audio/data streams are unicast and point to point. It isn't going to flood your network with data.

I realize that English probably isn't your first language so I'm trying to answer what I think your asking. Which is the ability to adjust NDI bandwidth for Internet transmission.

NDI bandwidth isn't user adjustable. There are two levels of bandwidth though. The default is the high quality mode which is what is typically used. There is also a low bandwidth mode (some might call proxy) that you can select in some applications (I believe that vMIx has added support in later versions, TriCaster has had automatic support for this mode from the start). Low bandwidth mode will force a NDI source into a lower resolution/datarate for limited bandwidth links, like WiFi. Low bandwidth mode is not probably something you want to use for program output unless you have no choice, as the quality of the image is lower. It might be used for monitoring or with a system where the image quality isn't a huge issue, like the background video for NewTek's NDI Telestrator for example.

If you are trying to get NDI to go long distances, a dedicated fibre link is one way to go. I know that we have had a few people get this setup and working already. I did a test at a location in the US, where we got 8 NDI video streams over a ~20 mile fibre link between two locations.

For internet transmission there is a product called NDI.Cloud coming from a company called Sienna, that will take NDI sources and "re-package" them for Internet transmission. I don't have all of the details, but basically it compresses the video into a smaller H.264 bit-stream and handles the higher latency of public Internet traffic. This product it not yet available, but I've worked with the developer for testing between London and Chicago and we have gotten NDI traffic working in both directions. You can check out more information on this product here. http://www.sienna-tv.com/ndi/ndirelay.html

Kane Peterson
NewTek

I doubt it's that adaptive. The primary goals were, as I understand it, quality and low-latency, which suggests that it's a relatively light codec. H264 and VPx are definitely not light.