On Wed, April 13, 2016 2:01 am, Kenneth Fields wrote:
We are on CERNET2 and Internet2 - good IPV6 networks.
Jacktrip in the common 8-channel case would then always
send Jumbo frames, right?
Independent things, a "good IPv6 network" does not necessarily imply jumbo
frame support. The network stack would still need to determine path MTU
before using large frames.
I did however find a reference on the Internet2 web page that said the
intention was to configure for 9kB frame support everywhere on Internet2.
There are lots of places a link could be misconfigured, though.
This link explains some of path MTU determination. It mentions some
differences with IPv6 but does not discuss:
There are some references there and in comments left about how to discover
MTU in a path and determine where MTU changes.
The IPv6 specification section 4.5 has this note:
(Note: unlike IPv4, fragmentation in IPv6 is performed only by source
nodes, not by routers along a packet's delivery path -- see section 5.)
Section 5 is titled "Packet Size Issues" and has this note:
It is strongly recommended that IPv6 nodes implement Path MTU
Discovery [RFC-1981], in order to discover and take advantage of path
MTUs greater than 1280 octets. However, a minimal IPv6
implementation (e.g., in a boot ROM) may simply restrict itself to
sending packets no larger than 1280 octets, and omit implementation
of Path MTU Discovery.
To me that sounds like the platform IPv6 layer should handle MTU
discovery, but I'm not sure if application level software has to
participate in that or not. I don't have any experience with the low
level details of programming network software in C or C++, in higher level
languages the libraries take care of a lot of that stuff behind the
scenes, and for software that only runs on a LAN I just assume that 1500
byte packets are supported and plan for that.
8 channels x 2 bytes (16bit) x 128 buffer size = 2048
The page for jacktrip has this description:
"It supports any number of channels (as many as the computer/network can
handle) of bidirectional, high quality, uncompressed audio signal
So in a case of 32 channels of 24 bit audio, that would be by your
32 x 3 x 128 = 12288 bytes
12288 bytes is the largest MTU I have seen used on switches, but that is
raw Ethernet packet size, not including Ethernet headers, IP headers, and
UDP headers. That means that 32 channels would not fit into a single
frame of any equipment I have seen, much less the more typical case of
1518 byte Ethernet MTU, so it is unlikely that jacktrip would require that
the entire audio frame fit into one Ethernet packet. I suppose it is
possible, the documentation I found doesn't really say what is meant by
"as many as the computerer/network can handle." My assumption would be
that is payload bandwidth limited, not packet size limited. You might have
to dig into the source to check. My first assumption would be that
jacktrip has been around long enough it would have come up before now if
packet size was really a problem.
I wonder how we did this before without problems?
Is it the different treatment of MTU on ipv6?
Did you actually use the exact same configuration before? Same end point
locations, same network route? If you switched from IPv4 to IPv6 then the
addresses in the header went from 32 bit addresses to 128 bit addresses.
IPv4 headers are 20 bytes and IPv6 headers are 40 bytes, so you lose 20
bytes of payload if you switch from IPv4 to IPv6 and keep the same
Even if you were using IPv6 on your comparison, something could have
changed in the path. You would need to compare traceroute results from
previous connections and current connections to see if the routing is the
same or has changed. The route could have changed, or even on the same
route equipment could have changed, or even just a configuration mistake
of the same equipment on the same route.
And of course packet fragmentation could be unrelated to the problems you
have, presumably you didn't analyze the transmission with wireshark when
everything was working properly, so you don't know if the audio data to
packet distribution is the same or different.
You could compare to a working connection and see if the behavior is
If for some reason the jacktrip application is handing down large packets
when the path does not support packets of that size, it would be
considered bad design practice. I think (not sure) that the IP layer may
fragment for you, but RFC 5405 says you should not do that:
"Due to these issues, an application SHOULD NOT send UDP datagrams
that result in IP packets that exceed the MTU of the path to the
destination. Consequently, an application SHOULD either use the path
MTU information provided by the IP layer or implement path MTU
discovery itself [RFC1191][RFC1981][RFC4821] to determine whether the
path to a destination will support its desired message size without
Are you sure the problem isn't just plain old dropped packets? Does
jacktrip give an indication if a sequence number is missed? Presumably
only the receiving side would know since UDP does not send ACK packets.
The only design document I could find was here:
That document explicitly says that clocks are not synchronized, which
means you should EXPECT to hear glitches regularly:
"...and deals with clock drifts and late
or un-recoverable packets by using a lower-level strategies
in ring buffers that can, e.g., sound like a wavetable synthesizer,
thus extending the musical sonority of the moment.
Clock drift between remote WAN machines is still an unsolved
issue and there are presumably new techniques to be
tried in the future, like adaptive re-sampling, packet crossfading,
Sounds like jacktrip is a basically broken design for network audio, and
you are going to get a continuous stream of glitches by design.