[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