[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 ----
          case RTCP_SDES_CNAME:
                  ui_send_rtp_cname(sp, sp->mbus_ui_addr, ssrc);
+                 ui_send_rtp_cname(sp, sp->mbus_video_addr, ssrc);
          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.


|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