16 Oct
2008
16 Oct
'08
7:35 a.m.
Hi,
reading recent posts concerning telnet there is one thing I have not yet
understood:
Why would I use telnet for interprocess communication rather than e.g.
transmitting commands between two applications via software MIDI ports ?
Is it (much) faster? Or do I get less protocol overhead, or...?
Thanks for shading some light on this,
Crypto.
16 Oct
16 Oct
7:56 a.m.
Am Donnerstag, 16. Oktober 2008 schrieb Crypto:
reading recent posts concerning telnet there is one
thing I have not yet
understood:
Why would I use telnet for interprocess communication rather than e.g.
transmitting commands between two applications via software MIDI ports ?
Is it (much) faster? Or do I get less protocol overhead, or...?
It is more flexible. On telnet (which is really network transmission) you can
do anything you want, either a text-based protocol (usable via telnet:)
containing easy-to-remember named commands. Or you can implement a binary
protocol and push data (even lots of data) around.
And its network transparent. For example you can have a headless audio-box
acting as your soundfont player (with linuxsampler) and control it via
network from qsampler from a different machine.
When using (software) MIDI you are fixed to the limitations of midi. And that
is so limiting that even the hw-synth manufacturers do the complicated stuff
in their own protocols encapsulated in midi-sysex...
Arnold
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a "rm -rf /". Or ask your
administrator to do so...
8:23 a.m.
Crypto wrote:
Hi,
reading recent posts concerning telnet there is one thing I have not yet
understood:
Why would I use telnet for interprocess communication rather than e.g.
transmitting commands between two applications via software MIDI ports ?
Is it (much) faster? Or do I get less protocol overhead, or...?
Thanks for shading some light on this,
Crypto.
Telnet is a bit of a misnomer anyway - it refers to using TCP socket
streams on a particular numbered port (23) to log in remotely to another
machine, whereas socket streams are more general than this and can be on
any port and have any higher level protocol embedded in them.
I.e. Telnet uses TCP sockets, but sockets aren't always used for telnet.
(E.g. http and ftp also use TCP sockets).
andy
9:12 p.m.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 11:23:12AM +0100, andy baxter wrote:
Crypto wrote:
Moore's Law?
In the 1980's a lot of protocols were binary, and designed for use over slow serial
links. Nowadays, it seems like new protocols are mostly text-based and descended from HTTP
or other Internet RFC's.
-ken
Hi,
reading recent posts concerning telnet there is one thing I have not yet
understood:
Why would I use telnet for interprocess communication rather than e.g.
transmitting commands between two applications via software MIDI ports ?
Is it (much) faster? Or do I get less protocol overhead, or...?
Thanks for shading some light on this,
Crypto.
Telnet is a bit of a misnomer anyway - it refers to using TCP socket
streams on a particular numbered port (23) to log in remotely to another
machine, whereas socket streams are more general than this and can be on
any port and have any higher level protocol embedded in them.
I.e. Telnet uses TCP sockets, but sockets aren't always used for telnet.
(E.g. http and ftp also use TCP sockets).
9:39 p.m.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 04:17:01PM -0700, Ken Restivo wrote:
In the 1980's a lot of protocols were binary, and
designed for use over slow serial links. Nowadays, it seems like new protocols are mostly
text-based and descended from HTTP or other Internet RFC's.
With as a result that sender apps are wasting their
time by converting internal binary data to <whatever
bloated format>, and receivers by doing the inverse
operation... :-]
Ciao
--
FA
Laboratorio di Acustica ed Elettroacustica
Parma, Italia
Lascia la spina, cogli la rosa.
17 Oct
17 Oct
12:28 a.m.
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 6:33 PM, Fons Adriaensen <fons(a)kokkinizita.net> wrote:
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 04:17:01PM -0700, Ken Restivo
wrote:
In the general case, where networked computers may have different
endian orientation or floating point representations, that is actually
necessary.
--
joq
In the 1980's a lot of protocols were binary,
and designed for use over slow serial links. Nowadays, it seems like new protocols are
mostly text-based and descended from HTTP or other Internet RFC's.
With as a result that sender apps are wasting their
time by converting internal binary data to <whatever
bloated format>, and receivers by doing the inverse
operation... :-]
5883
days inactive
5883
days old
linux-audio-user@lists.linuxaudio.org
5 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
andy baxter -
Arnold Krille -
Crypto -
Fons Adriaensen -
Jack O'Quin -
Ken Restivo