Am Freitag, 18. Januar 2008 schrieb Paul Davis: > On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 09:37 -0800, Fernando Lopez-Lezcano wrote: > > Is there anything inherently wrong with OSC as a _transport_ protocol? > > Anything that makes it unsuitable for that purpose within the framework > > of jack? (I know there have been threads about this before) > OSC is not a bus-oriented protocol, its 100% point-to-point. That is, > you do not put messages on a bus and all listeners pick it up. You have > to explicitly dispatch each OSC message to each target. this makes it > fundamentally different from MIDI, which, independent of the actual > physical transport layer, is bus oriented.
Nope! (I have read the specs...) The implementations make OSC a point-to-point protocol, because most implementations use UDP (and maybe some use TCP) for the transport. But the transport is actually _not_ part of the spec. The osc-spec only defines the messages passed around. And they are typically "I send them without knowing who receives them and what it does to them". I think it would be pretty easy and very good if jack got extended to JACK-OSC by providing ports to send and receive osc-messages similar to audio and midi. I don't know about the internal of the jack-code, but probably the message-passing of midi could be factored out to be used with any kind of messages... ++osc_in_jack 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...
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
