22 Jun
2004
22 Jun
'04
5:12 p.m.
On 22 Jun 2004, Michael Ost wrote:
On Mon, 2004-06-21 at 23:20, Benno Senoner wrote:
You dont want to compress if you want any kind of predictable latency.
we could divide 400 bytes into 100 midi events
consisting in:
1 byte timestamp relative to the audio fragment (0-127) , this would
limit the fragmentsize to max 256 frames
3 byte midi payload
A couple of thoughts:
Midi seems very compressable. You'd get a lot of 0x90s and 0x80s, for
instance. Is that worth pursuing? Is some sort of 'sequence' number needed to
make sure packets arrived in
the right order? Or perhaps UDP manages that...?
No, udp has no sequencing. You'll need to define your own sequencing
protocol.
You don't have to worry about out-of-sequence though unless you have
multipath. On a local LAN with ethernet switch, it should be impossible to
get out of sequence packets.
We're (Muse) also very interested in this sort of
technology. We'd most
likely want to run VNC alongside a protocol like this. Do you think that
would saturate a 100 base T network?
VNC *alone* can saturate 100bt single handedly.
If you want to do that youll want GbE. Fortunately GbE is dead cheap these
days.
-Dan