rtmp-services: Update ingest URL for Niconico Live Streaming(ニコニコ生放送)

[koizuka]

Description

Update: Consolidation of Niconico Service Entries

The distinction between free and premium members in the server selection list has been removed. The Niconico service entry has been consolidated into a single entry, as the latest settings no longer require a separation based on membership type.

This PR updates the ingest URL for Niconico Live Streaming in the rtmp-services configuration file. The previous ingest URL is no longer valid, and the service now requires an updated URL.

Additionally, this PR adds more_info_link and a link to a page that explains how to obtain the stream key (stream_key_link) to the Niconico service in services.json, providing users with direct access to relevant information.

Motivation and Context

This change is necessary because Niconico Live Streaming has updated its ingest URL. Without this update, users will not be able to stream to Niconico properly.

Niconico officially announced this change in the following blog post (Japanese):
🔗 ニコニコ生放送の配信エンドポイント変更について (Niconico Live Streaming Ingest URL Update)

How Has This Been Tested?

I have tested this update by adding the new RTMP server configurations to the services.json file and verifying that they appear correctly in the OBS Studio stream settings. Additionally, I have successfully conducted a live stream to Niconico Live Streaming using the updated ingest URL to confirm that it works as expected.
For the newly added more_info_link and stream_key_link, I verified that they correctly open the corresponding pages when clicked within the OBS Studio interface.

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)

• Tweak (non-breaking change to improve existing functionality)

Checklist:

• My code has been run through clang-format.
• I have read the contributing document.
• My code is not on the master branch.
• The code has been tested.
• All commit messages are properly formatted and commits squashed where appropriate.
• I have included updates to all appropriate documentation.

[Fenrirthviti]

Approved from an eligibility standpoint.

Is there still a difference between a free and premium member in the server selection list? They seem to be pointing to the same endpoints.

[koizuka]

Thank you for your review and approval.

Regarding your question, there is no difference between free and premium members in the server selection list; both use the same ingest endpoints.

The distinction between free and premium members is determined on the streaming platform’s side based on the stream key.

[Fenrirthviti]

Mostly just wondering if it's worth keeping both entries in the list if we're doing an update anyway. Is there was some specific reason you wanted to distinguish them? As it stands, it's just a UI option difference that doesn't seem necessary. Might be worth consolidating them.

[koizuka]

We separated them to reflect the recommended settings for each membership type, as free and premium members have different bitrate limits and other restrictions.

However, if there is a way to handle both within a single entry while still accommodating these differences, we would be happy to consider it. Do you have any suggestions on how we could achieve that?

[Fenrirthviti]

Ah, yes, I see the recommended settings are different for those, apologies I missed that in the first pass.

No further questions, all looks good to me!

[koizuka]

Thank you for your suggestion. After checking internally, we confirmed that the distinction between membership types is no longer necessary in the latest settings.

We will update the PR to consolidate the entries accordingly. I will push a revised commit shortly.

[koizuka]

Thank you for your feedback. I have pushed a revised commit that consolidates the Niconico service entries, as the distinction between membership types is no longer necessary.

Please let me know if any further adjustments are needed.

[koizuka]

I added alt_names for the migration, but it seems that the old settings are not automatically migrating as expected.

Could there be something wrong with the configuration? The name should match correctly, but it doesn’t seem to take effect...

Any insights would be appreciated!

[Fenrirthviti]

My understanding is that it is a soft-migration, and it just prevents invalid entries errors. They will see the new entry and can select it, but the old one will stay selected until they either switch it manually, or create a new profile. Once it's switched, the old entry will no longer show in the list.

This has no functional difference other than the listing name in the UI, so the recommended settings will apply correctly to any existing or new options after the services.json update.

[koizuka]

Thank you for the clarification.

If I understand correctly, this behavior is expected and there are no functional issues. In that case, it seems fine as it is.

Let me know if there’s anything else I should check!