Ulrich B. Staudinger wrote:
Am Di, 2003-11-25 um 15.00 schrieb Richard Dobson:
Just imagine you have ten people in a conference talking with each other .... a peer would send ten streams to ten people, that's quite a waste of bandwidth IMO.
True, but you don't *have* to do it this way. Perhaps some sort of circular architecture -- put all the participants in a "ring" -- each participant sends a message only to the next one on the ring which will forward the message to the next and so on and so forth until the person who sits before the one who sent the message gets it. Anyway, P2P has lots of NAT-traveling problems.
Yep but there are ways around the NAT problem in the majority of cases as already shown, but I do like this circular p2p architecture idea for conferences, seems like quite a good solution if worked on to work out and solve any problems.
Token ring in voice is simply nonsense. What if one of the users has a
slow machine? Every machine would have to 1) decode incoming data, 2)
mix his own data 3) encode again.
If we have 10 machines, and each machine takes 2ms to encode 10 ms of data, encoding 10 ms through the ten machines would take 20 ms (without packet travel time) for a frame to arrive at the first machine. nonsense.
Actually I wasn't thinking about each user decoding/mixing/encoding, but rather simply forwarding the raw packet to the next one in the ring.
Each endpoint has an incoming and outgoing queue -- when packets arrive at the incoming queue they're forwarded to the outgoing queue to be sent to the next point in the ring (without decoding), and also decoded locally. When a point wants to send something it injects the encoded packet to the outgoing queue.
Perhaps it is nonsense, I don't have any experience in such systems, the idea just popped into my head while writing the email.
Alon. _______________________________________________ jdev mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
