Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-05-14 Thread Marco Ballesio
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Rafal Wojtczuk < ra...@invisiblethingslab.com> wrote: > On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 09:24:27AM +0300, Marco Ballesio wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Rafal Wojtczuk < > ra...@invisiblethingslab.com> wrote: > > > Again, can I have a simple sound sharing over

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-05-12 Thread Rafal Wojtczuk
On Sun, May 09, 2010 at 09:24:27AM +0300, Marco Ballesio wrote: > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Rafal Wojtczuk > wrote: > > Again, can I have a simple sound sharing over network protocol, pretty > > pretty please ? Raw audio frames + simple synchronization, anyone ? > stupid question, but.. is

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-05-10 Thread Rafal Wojtczuk
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 02:10:49AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > > A solution acceptable from VM_HOST's point of view on security is: > > 1) Load module-simple-protocol-tcp in VM_HOST > > 2) Run pulseaudio daemon in VM_USER (and make users connect to it, instead > > to VM_HOST). Load module-pi

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-05-08 Thread Marco Ballesio
Hi, sorry for the late reply.. On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 6:10 PM, Rafal Wojtczuk < ra...@invisiblethingslab.com> wrote: > > Again, can I have a simple sound sharing over network protocol, pretty > pretty please ? Raw audio frames + simple synchronization, anyone ? > stupid question, but.. is GStr

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-26 Thread Colin Guthrie
'Twas brillig, and Rafal Wojtczuk at 26/04/10 15:47 did gyre and gimble: > Hmm, I tried loading module-rtp-send in the client and module-rtp-recv in > the server/trusted pulseaudio. The quality of sound was good, for a couple > of seconds; then it deteriorated, with dropouts and high frequencies >

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-26 Thread Rafal Wojtczuk
On Sun, Apr 25, 2010 at 02:10:49AM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote: > So, I said it many times and I say it again: you really want to make > sure that client and server can trust each other. The PA protocol is not > suitable as a security isolation for audio apps. Fair enough. > Something similar

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-24 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Fri, 23.04.10 17:10, Rafal Wojtczuk (ra...@invisiblethingslab.com) wrote: > > That way you don't need to run pulseaudio on a top security machine. > Yes, but the machine running pulseaudio may interact with other machines of > high security status, thus it is important to not make its security

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-24 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Fri, 23.04.10 09:04, Dan Kegel (d...@kegel.com) wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 8:10 AM, Rafal Wojtczuk > wrote: > > Again, can I have a simple sound sharing over network protocol, pretty > > pretty please ? Raw audio frames + simple synchronization, anyone ? > > RTMP might be suited for

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-24 Thread Lennart Poettering
On Fri, 23.04.10 13:36, Rafal Wojtczuk (ra...@invisiblethingslab.com) wrote: > Hello, > On Apr 5, Lennart wrote (about native protocol): > > Note that the protocol is kinda complex, both because it grew > > historically and because some parts have to be complex. i.e. the > > timing/flow control lo

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-23 Thread Dan Kegel
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 8:10 AM, Rafal Wojtczuk wrote: > Again, can I have a simple sound sharing over network protocol, pretty > pretty please ? Raw audio frames + simple synchronization, anyone ? RTMP might be suited for that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_Time_Messaging_Protocol It used to

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-23 Thread Rafal Wojtczuk
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 05:35:14PM +0300, Tanu Kaskinen wrote: > On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 13:36 +0200, Rafal Wojtczuk wrote: > > Hello, > > On Apr 5, Lennart wrote (about native protocol): > > > Note that the protocol is kinda complex, both because it grew > > > historically and because some parts hav

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-23 Thread Tanu Kaskinen
On Fri, 2010-04-23 at 13:36 +0200, Rafal Wojtczuk wrote: > Hello, > On Apr 5, Lennart wrote (about native protocol): > > Note that the protocol is kinda complex, both because it grew > > historically and because some parts have to be complex. i.e. the > > timing/flow control logic is non-trivial. R

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-23 Thread Rafal Wojtczuk
On Fri, Apr 23, 2010 at 01:13:05PM +0100, Colin Guthrie wrote: > 'Twas brillig, and Rafal Wojtczuk at 23/04/10 12:36 did gyre and gimble: > > A solution acceptable from VM_HOST's point of view on security is: > > 1) Load module-simple-protocol-tcp in VM_HOST > > 2) Run pulseaudio daemon in VM_USER

Re: [pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-23 Thread Colin Guthrie
'Twas brillig, and Rafal Wojtczuk at 23/04/10 12:36 did gyre and gimble: > A solution acceptable from VM_HOST's point of view on security is: > 1) Load module-simple-protocol-tcp in VM_HOST > 2) Run pulseaudio daemon in VM_USER (and make users connect to it, instead > to VM_HOST). Load module-pipe-

[pulseaudio-discuss] More on the native protocol complexity

2010-04-23 Thread Rafal Wojtczuk
Hello, On Apr 5, Lennart wrote (about native protocol): > Note that the protocol is kinda complex, both because it grew > historically and because some parts have to be complex. i.e. the > timing/flow control logic is non-trivial. Reimplementing that won't be > fun. > > tbh I don't think the native