FW: First implementation of Multi-source library in SSM networks announcement

[Ivan R. Judson]

I'm not sure the short path is the one we want in the long run, I think the
discussion is still open as to what information is venue-based and what is
client/node based.

Ie, does each client/node keep a database of information about the
senders/recievers it sees, or does that db live in the venue, and depending
on where it lives, what are the interfaces to access and possibly modify the
data in it.

These are all questions that we should discuss during the design phase so we
all understand the decisions and logic for the resulting solution(s).

--Ivan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Olson [mailto:olson at mcs.anl.gov] 
> Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 10:52 AM
> To: Thomas D. Uram
> Cc: judson at mcs.anl.gov; ag-dev at mcs.anl.gov
> Subject: Re: FW: First implementation of Multi-source library 
> in SSM networks announcement
> 
> 
> Can we put adding the IP address on the shortlist then? 
> That'll enable 
> folks to experiment with SSM stuff..
> 
> --bob
> 
> At 10:50 AM 9/8/2003 -0500, Thomas D. Uram wrote:
> 
> 
> >Robert Olson wrote:
> >
> >>At 09:51 AM 9/8/2003 -0500, Ivan R. Judson wrote:
> >>
> >>>Interesting thing, for future thinking.
> >>
> >>
> >>Yup. The functionality that these drafts attack is actually 
> somewhat 
> >>in
> >>overlap with what the AG infrastructure could provide in terms of 
> >>knowledge via the venue of the currently-active senders.
> >>
> >>Has the notion of adding data to the venue regarding the current IP
> >>address and ssrc id of the active video streams been 
> considered wrt the 
> >>producer/consumer framework? (the latter required for any 
> nontrivial 
> >>autolayout as well).
> >
> >It's been considered.  Adding the IP address is, of course, trivial; 
> >the
> >ssrc id requires being able to talk to vic, so hasn't gone 
> anywhere yet.
> >
> >Tom
> >
>