On Thu, Jul 08, 2010 at 03:10:31PM +0200, Corentin Chary wrote: > On Thu, Jul 8, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Daniel P. Berrange <berra...@redhat.com> > wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 07, 2010 at 08:57:56PM +0200, Corentin Chary wrote: > >> Introduce a new encoding: VNC_ENCODING_TIGHT_PNG [1] (-269) with a new > >> tight filter VNC_TIGHT_PNG (0x0A). When the client tells it supports the > >> Tight PNG > >> encoding, the server will use tight, but will always send encoding pixels > >> using > >> PNG instead of zlib. If the client also told it support JPEG, then the > >> server can > >> send JPEG, because PNG will only be used in the cases zlib was used in > >> normal tight. > > > > I know that VNC_ENCODING_TIGHT_PNG / -260 is already allocated to > > QEMU in the RFB specification. Who is the authority for allocating > > tight filter numbers, and have they recorded/approved use of 0x0A > > for this PNG capability ? > > > > Tight PNG should considered as a new encoding, not as a tight pseudo encoding. > When using Tight PNG, the server will send rect updates with -260, not 7.
Why layer this into the rest of the Tight protocol decoding then ? What benefit does it offer over a more straightforward standalone "PNG" encoding, that was completely independant of any tight based encoding. Regards, Daniel -- |: Red Hat, Engineering, London -o- http://people.redhat.com/berrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org -o- http://deltacloud.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: GnuPG: 7D3B9505 -o- F3C9 553F A1DA 4AC2 5648 23C1 B3DF F742 7D3B 9505 :|
