On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 12:38:38AM +0200, Pau Arumí wrote:
> But in my case I have multiple processes in the same computer that
> listens the same source (another process also in the same computer). If
> I understand well multicast, it does not help in my situation, right?
If your destination processes are just waiting for
commands without creating a permantent connection to
the source of these commands (in other words. they
are UDP receivers) then multicast is the way to go.
Instead of listining on a normal IP address the
receivers should join a multicast group. Liblo
does provide this AFAIK. Such a receiver is still
a 'server', which is somewhat misleading.
When creating a multicast socket you normally need
to provide not only the multicast IP address and
port but also an interface address. Liblo seems
to use INADDR_ANY for this in its multicast receiver,
which is rather strange.
AFAICS liblo does not provide a way to create a multicast
sender. Strangely there is a IP_MULTICAST_TTL option set,
but no I've found no IP_MULTICAST_IF option which would
be required in a sender.
Ciao,
-- FA Io lo dico sempre: l'Italia č troppo stretta e lunga. _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-devReceived on Mon Mar 30 04:15:07 2009
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Mon Mar 30 2009 - 04:15:07 EEST