Taneli, Please refer to the RFB protocol specification (http://www.realvnc.com/docs/rfbproto.pdf), in particular to the description of FramebufferUpdateRequests, which describes precisely when it is necessary to request non-incremental updates.
Regards, Wez @ RealVNC Ltd. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Taneli Leppd > Sent: 21 July 2005 23:50 > To: [email protected] > Subject: (devel) Question on FrameBufferUpdate and incremental > > Hello, > > The RFB proto specification isn't too clear on this issue: > > 1) I ask (and receive) a full framebuffer update (initial screen) > 2) then I continue to ask for framebuffer updates for a region of the > remote desktop, but keeping the first full update in memory > 3) I start asking for updates on a different region of the remote > framebuffer (non-overlapping with the first region) > > At the above situation, is the correct way to: > > 1) Use the incremental flag for the request for updates of > the new region, > since I do have its original state still in memory (ie. does > the server > know to send optimized updates considering I didn't express explicit > interest in the new region before except for the initial screen) > 2) Ask for a non-incremental update on the new region and > continue as usual? > > Of course the latter option should work always, but the former option > would definately save some bandwidth. > > -- > Taneli Leppd | Sektori.com > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | <http://sektori.com/> > _______________________________________________ > VNC-List mailing list > [email protected] > To remove yourself from the list visit: > http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list [email protected] To remove yourself from the list visit: http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
