Martin Peach wrote: > Roman Haefeli wrote: >> Martin Peach wrote: >>> Yes, and [unpackOSC] has no way of knowing if it is getting data from >>> UDP or TCP so it should probably assume the worst and go for TCP. In >>> fact, to be unbreakably robust it should assume it is getting input one >>> byte at a time and not output anything until either an entire OSC packet >>> has been received or the packet is not valid OSC. >> this is how i would like [unpackOSC] to behave. i don't see any other >> way to do OSC over tcp. >> > > I think opening a bundle and putting all the simultaneous messages in it, > then closing the bundle and sending it, will work over tcp. >
i did some test sending a file (over localhost). the limit seems to be at 65536. my test file is 49474 but i usually received 2 packets, rarely one single packet with 49474 bytes, sometimes even 3 packets. i guess this behaves the same for normal send messages (not whole files) it could be a real problem since we can't really tell if a bundle is complete. eni _______________________________________________ Pd-list@iem.at mailing list UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management -> http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-list
