What is the latency difference between RTMP and HLS?

RTMP generally offers lower latency than HLS, making it suitable for live events requiring real-time interaction. HLS, however, introduces a delay due to its segmented nature.

Which protocol is better for mobile devices?

HLS is generally preferred for mobile devices due to its broader compatibility and support for adaptive bitrate streaming.

Can I use both RTMP and HLS simultaneously for my YouTube livestream?

Yes, many streaming setups allow you to ingest the stream via RTMP and then have it transcoded and delivered via HLS to a wider audience.

Which protocol is more secure?

Both protocols can be secured, but HLS typically uses encryption methods (like AES-128) more readily. Proper configuration and security practices are crucial for both.

Which protocol is easier to set up?

HLS might be considered slightly easier for beginners because it relies on standard HTTP protocols, but both require understanding of the process. RTMP requires configuring more specific server-side components.

Is RTMP still relevant in 2024?

While HLS is dominant, RTMP remains relevant for its low-latency capabilities, particularly for professional setups where quick transmission is critical. It is often used as an ingest protocol for live streams, even when HLS is used for delivery.

YouTube RTMPs vs HLS: Choosing the Best Protocol for Live Streaming

A comprehensive comparison of RTMP and HLS for YouTube live streaming, covering latency, compatibility, security, and more, to help you choose the optimal protocol.

What are RTMP and HLS?

RTMP (Real-Time Messaging Protocol) and HLS (HTTP Live Streaming) are two distinct streaming protocols used to deliver video content over the internet. RTMP is an older protocol initially designed for Flash players, while HLS is a more modern protocol developed by Apple, primarily relying on HTTP for transport.

Why Choose Between RTMP and HLS?

Choosing between RTMP and HLS for your YouTube livestream is crucial because the protocol you select directly impacts latency, compatibility, scalability, and overall user experience. RTMP traditionally offers lower latency but has limited compatibility, especially with modern browsers. HLS, while having higher latency, boasts broader device support and better scalability. YouTube requires streams to be ingested via RTMP or SRT, then transcodes the input stream to other formats (including HLS) for distribution. The choice here involves selecting the best ingestion protocol and understanding the implications of each.

RTMP: The Real-Time Messaging Protocol

How RTMP Works

RTMP maintains a persistent connection between the encoder and the server. It transmits data using TCP, enabling a reliable stream. Data is sent as messages, multiplexed over a single connection. This persistent connection facilitates lower latency compared to protocols that rely on repeated HTTP requests. However, its reliance on TCP can be problematic on networks with high packet loss. RTMP is primarily used for the first mile of streaming (from the encoder to the streaming server), and often converted to HLS for end-user playback.

FFmpeg RTMP Example

1ffmpeg -re -i input.mp4 -c copy -f flv rtmp://your-rtmp-server/application/streamkey
2

Advantages of RTMP

Low Latency: RTMP's persistent connection allows for near real-time streaming, making it suitable for interactive applications.
Established Technology: It's a well-established protocol with a long history in streaming.
Encoding Control: Provides greater control over the encoding process.
Still Used for Ingest: Remains popular as an ingest protocol for sending streams to platforms like YouTube.

Disadvantages of RTMP

Limited Compatibility: Modern web browsers generally don't support direct RTMP playback without plugins (like Flash, which is now obsolete). Thus, not suitable for direct delivery to end users
Scalability Challenges: Can be more challenging to scale compared to HTTP-based protocols.
Firewall Issues: TCP-based nature can sometimes lead to issues with firewalls.
No Adaptive Bitrate Streaming: The original RTMP standard did not include adaptive bitrate streaming capabilities.

Get 10,000 Free Minutes Every Months

No credit card required to start.

HLS: The HTTP Live Streaming Protocol

How HLS Works

HLS segments the video into small chunks (typically a few seconds each) and delivers them over HTTP. An index file (playlist file, with .m3u8 extension) lists the available segments and their order. The player downloads the playlist file and sequentially requests the video segments. HLS supports adaptive bitrate streaming (ABS), where the player switches between different quality levels based on network conditions. This is typically implemented via multiple m3u8 playlists, each listing segments encoded at a particular bitrate.

Example HLS Playlist (.m3u8) file

1#EXTM3U
2#EXT-X-VERSION:3
3#EXT-X-MEDIA-SEQUENCE:0
4#EXT-X-TARGETDURATION:10
5#EXTINF:10.0,
6segment0.ts
7#EXTINF:10.0,
8segment1.ts
9#EXTINF:10.0,
10segment2.ts
11#EXT-X-ENDLIST
12

Advantages of HLS

Wide Compatibility: Supported by virtually all modern devices and browsers, including iOS and Android.
Scalability: Leverages standard HTTP infrastructure, making it highly scalable using CDNs (Content Delivery Networks).
Adaptive Bitrate Streaming (ABS): Dynamically adjusts video quality based on the user's network conditions, providing a smooth viewing experience.
Firewall Friendly: Uses standard HTTP ports (80 and 443), minimizing firewall issues.
Security: HLS supports encryption.

Disadvantages of HLS

Higher Latency: Due to the segmentation and buffering involved, HLS typically has higher latency than RTMP. Efforts are underway to reduce this latency with Low-Latency HLS (LL-HLS).
Increased Complexity: Setting up HLS can be more complex than setting up RTMP.
Bandwidth Overhead: The segmentation process can introduce some bandwidth overhead.

RTMP vs. HLS: A Head-to-Head Comparison

Latency: Real-time vs. Delayed Streaming

RTMP traditionally offers lower latency (around 5 seconds or less) compared to HLS. HLS, without specific optimizations, typically introduces latencies of 15-30 seconds or more. However, with the introduction of Low-Latency HLS (LL-HLS), this gap is narrowing. LL-HLS aims to achieve latencies of 3-5 seconds by reducing segment sizes and optimizing the delivery process. However, LL-HLS introduces its own set of complexities and isn't universally supported.

Compatibility and Browser Support

HLS has significantly better compatibility than RTMP, especially with modern web browsers. RTMP relied on Flash, which is no longer supported. HLS is natively supported by most browsers and operating systems. This makes HLS the clear winner for reaching a broad audience without requiring plugins.

Scalability and Distribution

HLS excels in scalability due to its HTTP-based nature. It seamlessly integrates with CDNs, allowing for efficient distribution of content to a large number of viewers. RTMP, while scalable, requires more specialized infrastructure and is less easily integrated with standard CDNs.

Security and Encryption

HLS supports encryption using HTTPS and AES encryption of the video segments. This provides a secure way to deliver content and protect it from unauthorized access. RTMP also supports encryption, but its implementation is less standardized and widely used.

Bandwidth Consumption

Both RTMP and HLS bandwidth consumption depend on the video bitrate. HLS, due to segmentation, can have slightly higher overhead. However, HLS's adaptive bitrate capabilities can result in lower overall bandwidth usage for viewers with poor network connections, as the player can switch to a lower quality stream.

Cost and Implementation

RTMP can be simpler to implement for basic streaming setups. However, scaling RTMP and ensuring compatibility can increase costs. HLS, while potentially more complex to set up initially, can be more cost-effective in the long run due to its integration with standard HTTP infrastructure and CDNs. Services that provide streaming infrastructure typically charge by bandwidth used. Bandwidth consideration for HLS is important to consider. Encoding servers are also important considerations for both protocols.

Choosing the Right Protocol for Your YouTube Livestream

Factors to Consider

Latency Requirements: If near real-time interaction is critical (e.g., live gaming or interactive Q&A), then optimizing for low latency ingest to YouTube is crucial. It's important to remember YouTube will convert to HLS.
Target Audience: If you need to reach a wide audience across various devices and browsers, HLS is the better choice for distribution.
Scalability Needs: If you anticipate a large number of concurrent viewers, HLS offers better scalability.
Security Concerns: If security is a priority, HLS provides robust encryption options.
Bandwidth Costs: Consider the bandwidth implications of each protocol, especially for viewers with limited bandwidth.
Complexity and Cost: Balancing the complexity of setting up each protocol with the overall cost is a critical factor.

Scenario-Based Recommendations

Gaming Livestream: Use RTMP or SRT for ingest to YouTube because of the low latency requirement, understanding YouTube will convert it for delivery.
Large-Scale Event: Use HLS for distribution due to its superior scalability and compatibility.
Mobile-Focused Livestream: Use HLS for distribution to ensure seamless playback on iOS and Android devices.

Conclusion: Making an Informed Decision

While RTMP remains a viable option for ingest to platforms like YouTube, HLS has become the dominant protocol for delivery due to its wide compatibility, scalability, and adaptive bitrate capabilities. Understanding the trade-offs between latency, compatibility, and cost is crucial for making an informed decision about which protocol is best suited for your specific YouTube livestreaming needs. Choose wisely and optimize for the best possible viewing experience for your audience.