Re: [LAD] Open Source Audio Interface

On Thu, 11 Sep 2014 14:24:56 -0700 (PDT) Len Ovens <len@email-addr-hidden>
wrote:
> Where I see your info as being useful though, is if I choose to send
> data (which could be varying sized packets) I may still wish to set
> the data packet size to a fixed size depending on what is left from
> audio. The whole network end of things needs to be decoupled from
> real time.

That last sentence is a bit contradicting. You want to send audio over
network, you want the audio to be near realtime. But you want to
decouple network from realtime... (In math: A==B && B==C && A!=C)

> To be honest, I have spent a lot less time thinking about the network
> traffic part of things than the audio part of things. The reason for
> this is that the use cases for allowing network through our line is
> small. As has already been commented, a desktop can have a second NIC
> and the laptop generally has wireless. The main usecase for network
> through the same IF might be radio work where one might have a SIP
> connection (phone line) going through net. (anyone see others?)
> Because the AI has a second NIC and an OS, it should be possible to
> set up the SIP session on that box.

There is a widespread use-case for audio and non-audio network traffic
on the same segment: audio and control/midi messages on the same
segment. And you don't want your fader moves to interrupt your audio.

And your current thinking seems to be about using a dedicated
network-link between PC and audio-interface with a possible chain-link
to other interfaces. But what about a dedicated network (with switch)
to connect multiple PCs and audio-interfaces? Then you have to deal
with lots more channels, thus lots more realtime data and also lots
more control-messages.

Have fun,

Arnold

PS: Maybe this question sound foolish: Why not AVB / open AVB?

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-dev