lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Dec]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] vtunerc: virtual DVB device - is it ok to NACK driver because of worrying about possible misusage?
On 06.12.2011 12:21, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 05, 2011 at 09:41:38PM +0100, Andreas Oberritter wrote:
>> On 05.12.2011 18:39, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
>
>>> When you put someone via the network, issues like latency, package
>>> drops, IP
>>> congestion, QoS issues, cryptography, tunneling, etc should be taken
>>> into account
>>> by the application, in order to properly address the network issues.
>
>> Are you serious? Lower networking layers should be transparent to the
>> upper layers. You don't implement VPN or say TCP in all of your
>> applications, do you? These are just some more made-up arguments which
>> don't have anything to do with the use cases I explained earlier.
>
> For real time applications it does make a big difference - decisions
> taken at the application level can greatly impact end application
> performance. For example with VoIP on a LAN you can get great audio
> quality by using very little compression at the expense of high
> bandwidth and you can probably use a very small jitter buffer. Try
> doing that over a longer distance or more congested network which drops
> packets and it becomes useful to use a more commpressed encoding for
> your data which may have better features for handling packet loss, or to
> increase your jitter buffer to cope with the less reliable transmit
> times.

Can you please explain how this relates to the topic we're discussing?


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-12-06 13:03    [W:1.382 / U:0.704 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site