[linux-audio-dev] OSC, mDNS and LASH: a good combo?

Martin Habets errandir_news at mph.eclipse.co.uk
Wed Mar 2 17:18:24 UTC 2005


On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 08:48:13PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 01, 2005 at 02:15:46 +0000, Martin Habets wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2005 at 09:35:34PM +0000, Steve Harris wrote:
> > > There is a proposed specification for discovery of OSC services that was
> > > presented at hte OSC conference, I intend to support it in liblo at some
> > > point in the future.
> > 
> > Do you have a link to this spec? Was it the one based on zeroconf?
> 
> Yes, and yes. http://www.opensoundcontrol.org/media/Rendezvous-OSC.pdf
> spec is too strong a word. I think theres a working group looking at
> it, but the binding of an OSC service into zeroconf is pretty aparent in
> any case.

Yes, I did see that one. Am a bit confused by their use of _osc._udp versus
osc.upd in a URL. They are different entities, but they look soo similar.
Can you explain how they relate, please?

> > > > To me this seems like a lot of overhead for a relatively small gain.
> > > > OTOH it seems like a very flexible and future-proof solution.
> > > 
> > > IIUC Gnome allready requires libhowl and mDNSResponder, so its not as
> > > burdonsome as it could be.
> > 
> > Not sure what you mean by the gnome connection. I would recommend against
> > running gnome (or KDE) when doing audio work, but that's just my angle on
> > it.
> 
> Some of the current freedesktop stuff requires an MDNS server, it was just
> an example that its becming widly used on linux. FC3 runs an MDNS demon at
> boot time for example.
> 
> Using an MDNS server means that you dont have to worry about implicitly or
> explicitly starting an OSC discovery demon, or anything like that.

Thanks for explaining. Your point is that regular desktop machines will be
using MDNS already, or will soon.

-- 
Martin



More information about the Linux-audio-dev mailing list