Anonymous wrote:...You want a protocol that has sequencing and error retries, I'm sure...
Rudi De Vos wrote:The bigest problem from going from tcp to udp is going from
reliable to unreliable connection.
Using udp, you need to implement an extra layer (simular to tcp) that
take care of packet lost, packet order etc...
Most "reliable udp" implementation i tested are slow and generate a big cpu overhead. (http://udt.sourceforge.net/)
Wrapping to UDP using enet ( http://enet.cubik.org/ / http://enet.bespin.org/ ) can reduce lots of work.Rudi De Vos wrote:Solution is more complex then just dropping updates.
Vnc does not have independed packets, content of a packet depend on previous packet.
Because you don't have 4, the content of 56789 is not longer valid.
**Resync need to be added.
**Packets need to become independed, a single packet need to contain
all needed info to perform an update and best fit in a single mtu
(Performance drop, compression of small packets is bad compared to bigger) Encoders need to be rewritten
**File transfer, clipboard copy can be corrupted
Vnc does not only distribute video, but also keyboard/clipboard,files....
You proposal is more suitable for 1 server to many viewers using broadcast (LAN), classroom model.
Teacher send his display to students.
Yes, udp works, if you write your application from start to be a udp
aware. Trying to port a tcp written app to support udp is a hell of a job.
- I'm not quite sure why TCP is seen to be "problematic" in relation to NAT/firewalls (in fact, I thought it was the other way around, UDP being "stateless" and thus, I assumed, difficult to handle for NAT), but then again, I'm no network expert. I'm guessing, however, that there could be other significant advantages to using a (more or less) custom protocol on top of UDP. As such, UDP has very low latency and overhead (ie. small headers + no forced/built-in handshaking/retransmission), allowing the "VNC protocol layer" (or whatever existing protocol might be chosen, such as some game-proto) to be very specific to the needs of VNC, without adding all the "generic" stuff present in TCP.
Any one is working on forcing VNC to use udp instead of tcp?
redge wrote:Any one is working on forcing VNC to use udp instead of tcp?
maybe yes, but most of majority developers know or/and found how to do, do it for his own business .... not for open source community.
if over UDP, is it backward compatible VNC TCP ?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests