Re: [LAD] Summercode 2008: LASH, pt. 3

On Wed, 2008-02-06 at 15:28 +0200, Juuso Alasuutari wrote: I think it's worth noting that at present clients, server interfaces and the client loader all use the same protocol. Here is a list (off the top of my head) of the kinds of information that are communicated using that protocol: Project names LASH client IDs Client type information Command line options Patch system client identifiers (JACK client names, ALSA client IDs) Patch system port identifiers (JACK port names, ALSA port IDs) Directory names Communication addresses (Hostnames, TCP port numbers, etc) Configuration data items Event notifications Save/load progress An ordinary client would use the following: Project names LASH client IDs Client type information Command line options Patch system client identifiers Patch system port identifiers Directory names Communication addresses Configuration data items Event notifications A server interface would use the following: Project names LASH client IDs Client type information Patch system client identifiers Patch system port identifiers Directory names Communication addresses Configuration data items Event notifications Save/load progress A remote lashd (similarly to the loader) would use the following: Project names LASH client IDs Client type information (Patch system client identifiers possibly) (Patch system port identifiers possibly) Command line options Directory names Communication addresses Configuration data items Event notifications It seems to me as though the protocol requirements are so similar that it would be silly to have more than one. I would also note that there is no need to have a master/slave distinction with remote lashds. Bob -- Bob Ham <rah(a)bash.sh>