Technical comparison of RTSP, WebRTC, HLS, SRT, RTMP, and ONVIF for video surveillance covering latency, scalability, and ideal use cases.
Video surveillance and live streaming rely on a handful of protocols, each designed for different network conditions, latency requirements, and use cases. Choosing the right protocol (or combination of protocols) is one of the most impactful architectural decisions in any video platform deployment.
The six protocols most relevant to surveillance and enterprise streaming in 2026 are RTSP, WebRTC, HLS (including LL-HLS), SRT, RTMP, and ONVIF. Here is how they compare across the dimensions that matter most.
RTSP (Real-Time Streaming Protocol) is the lingua franca of IP cameras. Virtually every surveillance camera supports RTSP for stream delivery. It provides low latency (typically 1-3 seconds) and works well for camera-to-server communication within local networks.
The limitation of RTSP is that it does not work in web browsers and struggles with NAT traversal, making it unsuitable for remote viewing without a gateway. Visylix ingests RTSP streams and converts them to WebRTC or HLS for browser-based viewing.
WebRTC delivers the lowest latency of any browser-compatible protocol, typically under 500 milliseconds. It handles NAT traversal via ICE/STUN/TURN, supports adaptive bitrate, and works natively in Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge without plugins.
The tradeoff is complexity at scale. WebRTC requires signaling infrastructure and SFU (Selective Forwarding Unit) servers for one-to-many distribution. Visylix abstracts this complexity, handling signaling, TURN fallback, and SFU fan-out transparently.
HLS excels for recorded playback, VOD, and large-audience broadcast via CDN. Low-Latency HLS reduces delay to 2-4 seconds but cannot match WebRTC for real-time monitoring. SRT (Secure Reliable Transport) is optimized for point-to-point contribution over unreliable networks, making it ideal for remote camera backhaul over cellular or satellite links.
RTMP, originally designed for Flash, remains relevant for server-to-server ingest and some legacy encoders. However, browser support has disappeared since Flash deprecation. In modern deployments, RTMP serves primarily as an ingest protocol rather than a viewer-facing protocol.
No single protocol satisfies every surveillance use case. The right approach is a multi-protocol streaming engine that ingests via RTSP/RTMP/SRT from cameras and delivers via WebRTC for live monitoring, HLS for playback, and SRT for remote contribution.
Visylix supports six protocols simultaneously (RTSP, WebRTC, RTMP, HLS, SRT, ONVIF), allowing operators to connect cameras and viewers using whichever protocol best fits their network conditions and latency requirements. Protocol translation happens transparently in the streaming engine.
WebRTC is the right choice for live monitoring because it delivers sub-500 ms latency in any modern browser with no plugins. HLS is better for recorded playback and large-audience broadcast over CDN. RTSP handles camera-to-server ingest inside the local network, and SRT is best for remote camera backhaul over unreliable cellular or satellite links.
Visylix supports 10 protocols simultaneously: WebRTC, RTSP, RTMP, HLS, SRT, NDI, RIST, ONVIF, GB28181, and HTTP-FLV. The streaming engine handles protocol negotiation and transcoding transparently, so each camera and each viewer can use the protocol that best fits their network and latency needs.
RTSP works well camera-to-server on a local network with 1 to 3 seconds of latency, but it does not run in web browsers and struggles with NAT traversal for remote viewing. In practice you need a gateway that ingests RTSP and converts to WebRTC or HLS for browser playback, which is exactly what Visylix does.
RTMP lost its role as a viewer protocol when Flash was deprecated, so no browser plays RTMP natively anymore. It still has a place as an ingest protocol for legacy encoders and server-to-server contribution. Most modern deployments use RTMP in, WebRTC or HLS out.