28.05.2014 02:56, Jay Sorg wrote: > Hi Alexander, > >> One big question up-front, sorry for not asking it earlier. Why do you need >> to invent a custom protocol to communicate with xrdp, instead of >> implementing something more standard inside XRDP? Especially since your >> custom protocol is essentially RTP over stream socket minus sequence numbers >> & timestamps, or ESD minus auth plus an 8-byte header? > > I wanted to limit dependencies and keep it simple but it looks like > that is a good idea. > I really did not know it was there. I think you are talking about > rtp.c and rtp.h. > Is there already a RTP implementation over Unix Domain Sockets? Unfortunately, no. All that exists is about multicast IPv4 or IPv6, and there even seems to be no way to suppress Session Announcement Protocol messages. > If we switch to this, many of your other comments are NA so lets just > address this one first. Well, a native unicast RTP sink implementation that takes the "target" parameter would be welcome. That's a lot of work, though. If you want something quick-and-dirty, with all the AV-sync issues inherent in your custom protocol due to lack of timestamps or other latency indicators on the wire, and can wait until June 6, I can help you add ESD protocol support in XRDP. This way, not a single line of PulseAudio source code would need to be changed. -- Alexander E. Patrakov
