I agree that this is not the usual use of UDP. However, the Behringer X32 communicates this way, and will not use TCP, so there is little choice.
Dennis Engdahl engdahl@snowcrest.net (530) 926-2996
On Wed, 26 Feb 2014, IOhannes m zmoelnig wrote:
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2014 09:47:44 +0100 From: IOhannes m zmoelnig zmoelnig@iem.at To: pd-dev@iem.at Subject: Re: [PD-dev] Requesting SVN commit access
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
On 2014-02-26 04:57, Martin Peach wrote:
I think that sending and receiving on the same port is not an intended use of the UDP protocol, which was designed for throw and forget messaging.
how come? how does DNS (after all, a central service in the internet) work with this assumption?
UDP works fine with as a challenge/response system (less so as client/server, given that there is no notion of a "connection"), and for responses you need o be able to send messages somewhere.
for whatever reasons, many hardware manufacturers have the idea that sending/receiving on the *same* port is a good idea.
fgmasdr IOhannes -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 Comment: Using GnuPG with Icedove - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJTDaorAAoJELZQGcR/ejb4rfgQAIPEiBRhdvB70ciSHpQlaaLU UfBfe+b1WMNx7sHYlSatzRV7hml2Qor3uZtH//7FVgn0I3868fQVlBYXYhZZjDRp y6FfSgyU13M01/Qqjy1rmO2p+JVZYOmITIJqArMatWpo13oaBST8nAb5ZWt2sltM OJa4iLTCZz9ysjyk+WakXsj6qYH9dUNA5BMtEVeFfWY4yquAqhStPV12r7dcP8UU i8myFGpaLAO4v+zsx7uEhycXwS0Z0uklyYsVK/IuEWUwbwBw23fuiI5Pmes6r+n+ Nm09raqtlIj2zof0p2DxG+BvWEj7f9iTM3fGbPhlILaYRdviyPAtE+9w9f2roTxn 1aLy+G10SzRs2LSTlG4wotwowS5HTLmRXTeLp5grnK1DMx2bJPtu+J4mvzTuwfb1 7xJOwh8NoEcox4N7dABubAJ7Btt/VP0youZewaS3FWDm2t7QgP4RfYZq1kbpt/x+ lUft6qQ+J48DlWK6qdK/4lP+3vqsKd8wXffcrn4GQ4oSO7XFtZeGtjSJLMYvB+IV N+zEdLUkeQwcF7YyUm6kB8N87y4k+mbAiOqiN42i6bXJUG5tmrslGGnxV5Ou04uw URls1w2RZhlyCbbngsla7+SbsFY8bQsO01VpxE7vZVe50yUgPyghAzAfAlqzsXlj sYIDjn+IFnqisZEmhZik =of+H -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Pd-dev mailing list Pd-dev@iem.at http://lists.puredata.info/listinfo/pd-dev