[AG-TECH] Audio losses synch (more technical questions)

S.Booth spb at epcc.ed.ac.uk
Thu Jun 13 04:00:55 CDT 2002


On Mon, 10 Jun 2002, S.Booth wrote:

> >  
> > I'm not sure where the breakdown occurred. Should rat broadcast cname
> > messages to all vics on occasion? Should vic ask for cname at a better time?
> >  
> 
> I asked a similar question on the UCL rat users list last week. 
> rat is supposed to be sending the rtp.source.cnames to vic as well.
> (I agree with you it does not) 
> Apparantly the rat developers are not using/testing with vic.
> It should be an easy fix to add this to rat. 
> 

The fix to the rat source to make it send the cname messages to attached
vics seems to be as simple as the following (output from cvs diff -c)

*** rtp_callback.c      2002/04/01 21:45:35     1.62
--- rtp_callback.c      2002/06/12 14:00:21
***************
*** 276,281 ****
--- 276,282 ----
                  break;
          case RTCP_SDES_CNAME:
                  ui_send_rtp_cname(sp, sp->mbus_ui_addr, ssrc);
+                 ui_send_rtp_cname(sp, sp->mbus_video_addr, ssrc);
                  break;
          case RTCP_SDES_NAME:
                  ui_send_rtp_name(sp, sp->mbus_ui_addr, ssrc);


However we still need a fix for the different cnames. It might be possible
to persuade vic to match cnames that only differ in the last octet of the
ip-address in the cname but it would be cleaner in the long run to
synchronise the AG node cnames as discussed earlier.


				Stephen

======================================================================
|epcc| Dr Stephen P Booth             Project Manager           |epcc|
|epcc| s.booth at epcc.ed.ac.uk          Phone 0131 650 5746       |epcc|
======================================================================




More information about the ag-tech mailing list