HDMI to IPTV converter

emaherx

Johnny1951 did you try tvheadend? I tried it yesterday but couldn't figure out how to setup the stream.

Johnboy1951

Thanks for the details .... appreciate it.

It is good that you got it working, although for me needing to use an extra device rather defeats the purpose as it is added cost.

At one time I took the multicast stream into Kodi using IPTV Simple and dispensed with the iptables command and still had a stable stream.
I used it for some hours without problems but could not record the stream.
Probably the later versions of tvheadend can take this stream in directly which would allow recording?

OK, the multicast operation caused problems for the rest of the LAN, even though I tried to isolate the device on its own IGMP snooping capable switch. I never did find out why this did not work. Probably because I am not familiar enough with the requirements for managing it.

When trying various commands trying to change to unicast, I did succeed (I believe) in specifying the unicast address, only to have the device operate as multicast.

There just might be a method of specifying this address, then switching off multicast, to see if the stream remains on the specified address as unicast.

Of course I might well be mistaken about specifying that address so lots of trial and error will be needed to try to duplicate it.
Maybe next week I will get the chance to 'interfere' with the set up without upsetting others in the household!

Thanks again for the details

Johnboy1951

I wonder if you could test something to see if it is somehow dependent on my LAN topography or if it will work for you.

I used a command which needs to be tweaked etc etc, but is sufficient to test here.

# curl "http://192.168.1.102/dev/info.cgi?action=streaminfo&udp=n&rtp=y&multicast=n&unicast=y&mcastaddr=192.168.1.101&port=5004"

I am able to receive the stream on
udp://@192.168.1.101:5004
using VLC.

By changing the destination IP I can observe the stream changing on the LAN switches.
Although Multicast is ticked in the WebGUI the stream is apparently not multicast.

I would be interested in any results you get while running some tests with the above.

EDIT:

I can change the stream to any device on the LAN with this reduced command

curl "http://192.168.1.102/dev/info.cgi?action=streaminfo&multicast=n&mcastaddr=192.168.1.113"

.

emaherx

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Thanks for the details .... appreciate it.

It is good that you got it working, although for me needing to use an extra device rather defeats the purpose as it is added cost.

Not ideal no, but if I can get it 100% stable on a R-Pi then there is no extra device for me except a 10 Euro USB Ethernet adapter. As I want to stream a Blu-ray player which will be connected to the same TV as a R-Pi running Libreelec.

emaherx

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

By changing the destination IP I can observe the stream changing on the LAN switches.
Although Multicast is ticked in the WebGUI the stream is apparently not multicast.

The Multicast button it would seem is to change from UDP Multicast to RTSP/TCP Unicast so if you untick it you stop all UDP traffic which will make it useless to us unless we were to know the exact RTSP URL. What you are doing is a bit of a hack for this device as you are essentially just sending the multicast Stream to a single Unicast IP address.

Johnboy1951

emaherx wrote: »

The Multicast button it would seem is to change from UDP Multicast to RTSP/TCP Unicast so if you untick it you stop all UDP traffic which will make it useless to us unless we were to know the exact RTSP URL.

That would seem to be the case.

What you are doing is a bit of a hack for this device as you are essentially just sending the multicast Stream to a single Unicast IP address.

Yes it is ..... but is all I've got for now
.... and it is working for that one destination without crashing the LAN.

I was hoping you might get some insight or be able to determine the URL from your use of the R-Pi.

emaherx

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

That would seem to be the case.

Yes it is ..... but is all I've got for now
.... and it is working for that one destination without crashing the LAN.

Oh, i know without the UDP output we would have nothing at all and that wasn't meant as a criticism.

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

I was hoping you might get some insight or be able to determine the URL from your use of the R-Pi.

I don't think so, due to the nature of the TCP stream there is nothing to see without a session being created first and without knowing the URL I can't create the session.

UDP is different because it spews out data and doesn't care if there is a client listening or not.

I tried to use some programs to brute force the URL but I think they just use a dictionary of known words used in common RTSP devices which are mostly CCTV they usual have a URL like rtsp://192.168.1.10:554/DVR/CAM1 I was hoping ours would be something like rtsp://192.168.1.10:554/IPTV or rtsp://192.168.1.10:554/IPTV/STREAM but really it could be anything and there could be a username and password as part of the URL also.

I think the most likely way to find the URL is to have the RX device also set to Unicast through its GUI (would probably need a certain firmware level also) and intercept the packets between the two devices, unless the lads pulling the firmware apart find the URL.

Johnboy1951

In my client list of switch the device is called

android-17790f2c2402 3c9a

The device name from the terminal access on Port 9999 using NC is

get_device_name
TX_00ABE3B2DEBC

I wonder if that is just a 'best guess' by the switch or if there really is something "Android" about the device that might be exploited?

emaherx

Something Android? like the OS? I'm going to say no given that Danaman's Blog have looked at the installed chips and even read the files on the onboard flash, if there was anything of that complexity he would have been all over it.

Your Device name is built from TX for transmitter followed by Mac address

Johnboy1951

emaherx wrote: »

Something Android? like the OS? I'm going to say no given that Danaman's Blog have looked at the installed chips and even read the files on the onboard flash, if there was anything of that complexity he would have been all over it.

Yeah, I guess you are right ..... wishful thinking on my part.

Your Device name is built from TX for transmitter followed by Mac address

Nelbert

Did you get this working stable and reliable? I'd be interested in it. Resubscribed to sky and looking for a clean and high WAF (i.e. few cables as possible) method of integrating one of the sky boxes around the house.
Would integrate it into TVHeadend and then share to other HTPC boxes from there.

Johnboy1951

Nelbert wrote: »

Did you get this working stable and reliable? I'd be interested in it. Resubscribed to sky and looking for a clean and high WAF (i.e. few cables as possible) method of integrating one of the sky boxes around the house.
Would integrate it into TVHeadend and then share to other HTPC boxes from there.

You should look at something like this IMO
http://www.freetv.ie/hdmi-modulator/

Nelbert

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You should look at something like this IMO
http://www.freetv.ie/hdmi-modulator/

So what I recommended originally? Had a feeling the cheap iptv meant grief and heartache. My hope was you'd have nailed it down by now.
Gonna go with the triax unit, move sky box towards server and use existing cabling the other way round to carry the IR via sky eye thingys

Johnboy1951

Nelbert wrote: »

So what I recommended originally? Had a feeling the cheap iptv meant grief and heartache. My hope was you'd have nailed it down by now.
Gonna go with the triax unit, move sky box towards server and use existing cabling the other way round to carry the IR via sky eye thingys

You could get both TX & Rx which would avoid all messing about.
I noticed the more recent versions have the ability to feed multiple Rx and also can carry IR signals.

Nelbert

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You could get both TX & Rx which would avoid all messing about.
I noticed the more recent versions have the ability to feed multiple Rx and also can carry IR signals.

So something like this?
http://m.ebay.co.uk/itm/1080P-3D-100m-120m-HDMI-Extender-Over-Single-LAN-RJ45-Cat5-6-Cable-TCP-IP-Router-/121708232481?hash=item1c56603f21%3Ag%3AcXYAAOSwPcVVq-hg&_trkparms=pageci%253A4f34180a-78e4-11e7-b90c-74dbd1803d54%257Cparentrq%253Aac16d3aa15d0a9cbad3fd4b9fffc2bb5%257Ciid%253A1

emaherx

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

You could get both TX & Rx which would avoid all messing about.
I noticed the more recent versions have the ability to feed multiple Rx and also can carry IR signals.

Even using RX and TX devices you would still have the multicast storm issue. Which is our only issue with the device anyway.

It's possible the right switches would sort that, but your switches which are meant to handle multicast traffic couldn't, so until we test other switches I couldn't recommend that.

You could always use a dedicated switch to make a Network just for these, but that gets expensive.

The proxy solution does work but relies on another device with 2 NIC’s.

As a matter of interest how does the DVBT modulator behave when distributed along with the Saorview signal? Or is that the reason you are building a 3 tuner DVBT server?

Nelbert

emaherx wrote: »

Even using RX and TX devices you would still have the multicast storm issue. Which is our only issue with the device anyway.

It's possible the right switches would sort that, but your switches which are meant to handle multicast traffic couldn't, so until we test other switches I couldn't recommend that.

You could always use a dedicated switch to make a Network just for these, but that gets expensive.

The proxy solution does work but relies on another device with 2 NIC’s.

As a matter of interest how does the DVBT modulator behave when distributed along with the Saorview signal? Or is that the reason you are building a 3 tuner DVBT server?

Getting wife approval for purchase at the moment..... a lot of the iptv devices all specify gigabit switches etc. which is a red flag for network load... running second lan cables not an option.

The 3 DVB-T is more of an ideal. One dedicated to Sky, one dedicated to each Mux on soarview. Initially I'll probably use one of the two DVB-T I have and run soarview through it too (from my research it should be a non-issue) to keep initial costs down.
Will likely buy modulator initially then following pay day buy io link and sky eyes if wife not fully satisfied. Hoping wife will use sky plus app for time being.

It'll all be feed into tvheadend and distributed same as our soarview and freesat channels currently are. Just going to give the sky box it's own channel number on tvheadend. By moving the sky box to my tvheadend server the existing satellite cables can be used for sky eyes (my server and dish are only small distance apart).

Did I not read earlier in the thread you bought one of the modulators?

Johnboy1951

For some reason I have not investigated, when using the Sky+HD box through the modulator, there is an appreciable delay from pressing the remote to a reaction on the display. All equipment in the same room.
I think the delay here is about 5 secs.
It could also be due to my particular hardware and set up ... don't know.

I have a similar delay in Kodi when changing channel from Sky-Box to IPTV-Stream from the LK device.

It does not affect me as I use it only when I have a particular program to view ..... maybe a match or such .... so I do not require quick channel change.

emaherx wrote: »

Even using RX and TX devices you would still have the multicast storm issue. Which is our only issue with the device anyway.

I wondered if the behaviour of the multicast stream would in some way be 'corrected' by having its own Rx to talk to.

It's possible the right switches would sort that, but your switches which are meant to handle multicast traffic couldn't, so until we test other switches I couldn't recommend that.

You could always use a dedicated switch to make a Network just for these, but that gets expensive.

The proxy solution does work but relies on another device with 2 NIC’s.

As a matter of interest how does the DVBT modulator behave when distributed along with the Saorview signal? Or is that the reason you are building a 3 tuner DVBT server?

My idea for 3 tuners was simply to ensure all Saorview channels be available, in addition to the Edision.
The Edision is essentially a third mux (with one channel).

The Edision output can be combined with the aerial, apparently without any negative consequences. I had worried that the strength of the Edision output might have some detrimental affect, but so far I have not noticed any.

emaherx

No the network switch "should" handle the multicast traffic and only allow data out on ports where it is requested.

It's a very efficient way of delivering a single video stream to multiple devices and actually reduces network load when it works.

emaherx

Nelbert wrote: »

Did I not read earlier in the thread you bought one of the modulators?

That I believe was Johnboy1951

Johnboy1951

emaherx wrote: »

No the network switch "should" handle the multicast traffic and only allow data out on ports where it is requested.

It's a very efficient way of delivering a single video stream to multiple devices and actually reduces network load when it works.

Yes I understand that ...... but the stream is going straight through.

My thought was that the Tx expects to find its companion receiver/s on the LAN.
Just maybe, failing to receive a recognisable response from a Rx is the reason for our probs.

..... or maybe not ......

Johnboy1951

Nelbert wrote: »

So something like this?
http://m.ebay.co.uk/itm/1080P-3D-100m-120m-HDMI-Extender-Over-Single-LAN-RJ45-Cat5-6-Cable-TCP-IP-Router-/121708232481?hash=item1c56603f21%3Ag%3AcXYAAOSwPcVVq-hg&_trkparms=pageci%253A4f34180a-78e4-11e7-b90c-74dbd1803d54%257Cparentrq%253Aac16d3aa15d0a9cbad3fd4b9fffc2bb5%257Ciid%253A1

Not sure about that one ....... I came across similar devices which had an IR facility and also would multicast to multiple Rx.
I don't have a link at present.

EDIT:

This is one with an IR Tx/Rx
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/120m-HDMI-Over-Ethernet-Extender-Single-Cable-Supports-IR-/172535454773?hash=item282bea1c35:g:KmUAAOSw2gxYpld8

but unsure about multiple receivers on that device ........ if you require the signal at multiple locations.

emaherx

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Yes I understand that ...... but the stream is going straight through.

My thought was that the Tx expects to find its companion receiver/s on the LAN.
Just maybe, failing to receive a recognisable response from a Rx is the reason for our probs.

..... or maybe not ......

No, the whole point of multicast is it shouldn't wait for or care about a response it just sends out data regardless if any other devices are listening. And it's data is addressed to everyone so simple switches just forward the data to everyone as they don't know what else to do with it. Smart switches should only forward to ports where a device shows interest.

Johnboy1951

emaherx wrote: »

No, the whole point of multicast is it shouldn't wait for or care about a response it just sends out data regardless if any other devices are listening. And it's data is addressed to everyone so simple switches just forward the data to everyone as they don't know what else to do with it. Smart switches should only forward to ports where a device shows interest.

Yes, but unfortunately we I do not know if these devices are properly compliant or what arrangement they have for connecting to their receivers.
I doubt they are compliant.
Those two switches of mine work for other multicast streams as I recall, but not here.

Nelbert

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Not sure about that one ....... I came across similar devices which had an IR facility and also would multicast to multiple Rx.
I don't have a link at present.

EDIT:

This is one with an IR Tx/Rx
http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/120m-HDMI-Over-Ethernet-Extender-Single-Cable-Supports-IR-/172535454773?hash=item282bea1c35:g:KmUAAOSw2gxYpld8

but unsure about multiple receivers on that device ........ if you require the signal at multiple locations.

will probably stick with the modulator idea. Seems less potential hiccups and tvheadend is already working really well with good WAF with kodi front ends.

Johnboy1951

Nelbert wrote: »

will probably stick with the modulator idea. Seems less potential hiccups and tvheadend is already working really well with good WAF with kodi front ends.

I tend to agree .... less complicated set up and channel can be recorded just like any other DVB-T channel.

emaherx

Id be inclined to agree and I haven't tried the DVBT modulator device, but it sounds like a much more network friendly idea. At least with consumer grade network kit anyway.

mick_ser

Have stacked 5 x Technomate HDMI modulators and Saorview no issues. http://www.technomate.com/products/TM%252dRF-HD.html
Got deal for them see http://www.megavision.ie/tm-rf-hdmi-mod.html

Anyone recommend a good encoder? Where best to get them? Everyone using the iSolem?

Nelbert

mick_ser wrote: »

Have stacked 5 x Technomate HDMI modulators and Saorview no issues. http://www.technomate.com/products/TM%252dRF-HD.html
Got deal for them see http://www.megavision.ie/tm-rf-hdmi-mod.html

Anyone recommend a good encoder? Where best to get them? Everyone using the iSolem?

Do you just daisy chain them and then combine with soarview right at the end?
Good to know there's no issues. The giant internet bookstore seems to be a good bit cheaper than the link you posted with the current exchange rate.

Johnboy1951

mick_ser wrote: »

Have stacked 5 x Technomate HDMI modulators and Saorview no issues. http://www.technomate.com/products/TM%252dRF-HD.html
Got deal for them see http://www.megavision.ie/tm-rf-hdmi-mod.html

Anyone recommend a good encoder? Where best to get them? Everyone using the iSolem?

Seem to be a well priced unit ...... £129.99 (€144.30) from Tech store
http://www.technomate.com/store/products/TM%252dRF-HD.html