January 2004 - Ag-tech - mailman3.cels.anl.gov

Re: [AG-TECH] Quick test
by Gurcharan.S.Khanna＠Dartmouth.EDU 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

hi, sorry, jeremy, can't see you there yet. -gurcharan =========================== Gurcharan S. Khanna, Associate Director Research Computing, Dartmouth College gkhanna(a)dartmouth.edu office: 603-646-1644 http://research.dartmouth.edu/ http://www.dartmouth.edu/~gkhanna --- You wrote: Can someone on AG1 pop their head into the Test Room and let me know if they can see my video stream? It should be a flashing blue screen. --- end of quote ---

1 0

Re: [AG-TECH] Quick test
by Jeremy Mann 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

Tom Coffin said: > > don't see ya... I just got off the phone with our Networking people. They can see my multicast stream to the Test Room, but then he says the Cisco router is flagging it 'pruned'. He explained 'pruned' as the router hasn't received an incoming packet wanting my stream, so it discards it. My question to him was how can somebody connect to my stream if they can see or hear me? Is there somebody on this list that would could offer an insight into our Multicast problem? -- Jeremy Mann jeremy(a)biochem.uthscsa.edu University of Texas Health Science Center Bioinformatics Core Facility http://www.bioinformatics.uthscsa.edu Phone: (210) 567-2672

1 0

Quick test
by Jeremy Mann 28 Jan '04

28 Jan '04

Can someone on AG1 pop their head into the Test Room and let me know if they can see my video stream? It should be a flashing blue screen. Thanks! -- Jeremy Mann jeremy(a)biochem.uthscsa.edu University of Texas Health Science Center Bioinformatics Core Facility http://www.bioinformatics.uthscsa.edu Phone: (210) 567-2672

1 0

RE: [AG-TECH] H263
by Ivan R. Judson 27 Jan '04

27 Jan '04

Btw, I just confirmed that our existing ag-vic code does not crash in the presence of the OM h.263 streams. It was an incorrect condition in how ag-vic was determining the H.263 frame size (the custom flag was wrong in ag-vic). I've entirely removed H.263 codecs from ag-vic, so ag-vic now just drops these packets like any other codec it doesn't recognize. It's not great, but it's better than crashing :-) --Ivan PS -- This will be in the next version of the AGTk in the spring release. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ag-tech(a)mcs.anl.gov > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew Swan > Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2004 1:07 AM > To: Gurcharan S. Khanna > Cc: jeremy(a)biochem.uthscsa.edu; ag-tech(a)mcs.anl.gov > Subject: Re: [AG-TECH] H263 > > Gurcharan S. Khanna wrote: > > can you even do 640x480 with non-omvic? i thought i tried some time > > ago and never got that to work for some reason. > > as long as you use h.261, all you can do is 352x288 or > 176x144 (also called cif or qcif). this isn't a shortcoming > of vic, it is part of the h.261 standard. the bitstream > syntax simply doesn't have a way to specify arbitrary frame > resolution, all it has is a single bit to select cif or qcif. > > there are various patches floating around to implement h.263 > in uclvic which could probably be applied to agvic without > too much trouble but as far as i know, omvic is the only one > being actively worked on... > > -Andrew > >

1 0

Jt. Techs is on the AG!
by Bob Riddle 27 Jan '04

27 Jan '04

The video bugs & audio bugs seem to be worked out - please join us in sunny Hawaii in the Internet2 room, off the Institutional Lobby! -- Bob Riddle (bdr(a)internet2.edu) Technologist,Internet2 3025 Boardwalk, Suite 100 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48108 Business Phone: 734.913.4257 Fax Number: 734.913.4255 "Opportunity is missed by most people because it is dressed in overalls and looks like work" Thomas Edison

1 0

RE: [AG-TECH] Unicast issues with vic/rat
by Don Morton 27 Jan '04

27 Jan '04

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:28:04 -0600, "Ivan R. Judson" <judson(a)mcs.anl.gov> said: > > I'm working on it ;-), but I've got a site review dry-run all day. As > soon > as I have something compiled, I'll send it to Don (wider distribution is > probably a bad idea until we can do some testing and packaging). Don can > share it with his friends and family and give me feedback as to how it > performs. If it's acceptable we'll provide this asap to the rest of the > community. > > Does that work for everyone? That sounds great, Ivan, and very much appreciated. I'll be happy to provide feedback. > > --Ivan > > PS - Don, I was out there at christmas, but I never seem to get enough > time > to pop up to missoula -- now that you can fly, mebbe this summer you can > hop > down to Three Forks airport (12 miles from my house) and we can buzz > Turners > 25k acres and look for buffalo :-) That's actually a pretty good idea! Been meaning to get out there east of the Divide, and Three Forks sounds perfect! Let me know when you're coming back to the "real world" :) -- ************************************************************** Don Morton http://www.cs.umt.edu/~morton/ Department of Computer Science The University of Montana Missoula, MT 59812 | Voice (406) 243-4975 | Fax (406) 243-5139 May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. -Edward Abbey, naturalist and author (1927-1989)

1 0

RE: [AG-TECH] Unicast issues with vic/rat
by Ivan R. Judson 27 Jan '04

27 Jan '04

I'm working on it ;-), but I've got a site review dry-run all day. As soon as I have something compiled, I'll send it to Don (wider distribution is probably a bad idea until we can do some testing and packaging). Don can share it with his friends and family and give me feedback as to how it performs. If it's acceptable we'll provide this asap to the rest of the community. Does that work for everyone? --Ivan PS - Don, I was out there at christmas, but I never seem to get enough time to pop up to missoula -- now that you can fly, mebbe this summer you can hop down to Three Forks airport (12 miles from my house) and we can buzz Turners 25k acres and look for buffalo :-) > -----Original Message----- > From: Don Morton [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2004 10:20 AM > To: Judson, Ivan R.; 'Andrew Swan' > Cc: 'Sergeant A. G. Tech'; 'Jennifer Parham'; > jeh(a)cs.clemson.edu; westall(a)cs.clemson.edu; 'Dan Schmiedt'; > ron_crummett(a)hotmail.com > Subject: RE: [AG-TECH] Unicast issues with vic/rat > > > On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 22:03:48 -0600, "Ivan R. Judson" > <judson(a)mcs.anl.gov> > said: > > > > I have applied these to the code in the AG cvs repository under the > > module ag-media. This is a unified module representing ag-vic and > > ag-rat (but now we only have to keep one copy of the common library > > and tcl and tk :-). > > > > We'll be sure to include this in the next release ;-) > > > > --Ivan > > > > > Sooooo, would anybody happen to have copies of Windows > binaries of these > available? I just tried the openmash 5.2 vic, but it doesn't seem to > recognize a flag of -rtptv > > > > > > > > > probably the easiest way to verify that this is the problem > > > is to rebuild vic with the attached patch and run the > > > modified version at the remote site. or if you have openmash > > > vic installed, you can just add the flag "-rtptv" to the vic > > > command line to get the same effect. > > > > > > -Andrew > > > > > > > > > -- > > ************************************************************** > Don Morton http://www.cs.umt.edu/~morton/ > Department of Computer Science The University of Montana > Missoula, MT 59812 | Voice (406) 243-4975 | Fax (406) 243-5139 > > May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, > leading to the > most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. > -Edward Abbey, naturalist and author (1927-1989) > >

1 0

RE: [AG-TECH] Unicast issues with vic/rat
by Don Morton 27 Jan '04

27 Jan '04

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 22:03:48 -0600, "Ivan R. Judson" <judson(a)mcs.anl.gov> said: > > I have applied these to the code in the AG cvs repository under the > module > ag-media. This is a unified module representing ag-vic and ag-rat (but > now > we only have to keep one copy of the common library and tcl and tk :-). > > We'll be sure to include this in the next release ;-) > > --Ivan > Sooooo, would anybody happen to have copies of Windows binaries of these available? I just tried the openmash 5.2 vic, but it doesn't seem to recognize a flag of -rtptv > > > > probably the easiest way to verify that this is the problem > > is to rebuild vic with the attached patch and run the > > modified version at the remote site. or if you have openmash > > vic installed, you can just add the flag "-rtptv" to the vic > > command line to get the same effect. > > > > -Andrew > > > > > -- ************************************************************** Don Morton http://www.cs.umt.edu/~morton/ Department of Computer Science The University of Montana Missoula, MT 59812 | Voice (406) 243-4975 | Fax (406) 243-5139 May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. -Edward Abbey, naturalist and author (1927-1989)

1 0

RE: [AG-TECH] Unicast issues with vic/rat
by Ivan R. Judson 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

I have applied these to the code in the AG cvs repository under the module ag-media. This is a unified module representing ag-vic and ag-rat (but now we only have to keep one copy of the common library and tcl and tk :-). We'll be sure to include this in the next release ;-) --Ivan > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-ag-tech(a)mcs.anl.gov > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Andrew Swan > Sent: Monday, January 26, 2004 8:44 PM > To: Don Morton > Cc: Sergeant A. G. Tech; Jennifer Parham; jeh(a)cs.clemson.edu; > westall(a)cs.clemson.edu; Dan Schmiedt; ron_crummett(a)hotmail.com > Subject: Re: [AG-TECH] Unicast issues with vic/rat > > Don Morton wrote: > > For some reason, there are folks who are trying to unicast > in, and the > > end result seems to be that "we" can see them, but they > can't see us. > > Note that there's no multicast involved here - in one case, > the bridge > > is simply being used as a "rendezvous point" > > for two unicast streams, but the same problems occur - I seem to be > > able to see/hear the remote site, but they can't see/hear me. > > > > [...] > > > > My vague understanding of vic/rat, used with the > QuickBridge, is that > > the clients send UDP datagrams out to the bridge on ports > in the 50000 > > range, and they seem to receive UDP datagrams on ports in the 32000 > > range, and it "should" be that simple. > > i'm not sure about rat but vic in unicast mode sends and > receives on the same port, which is specified on the command > line. (the ports in your example were in the 50000 range). > the source port in packets sent from vic will be an > "ephemeral port" chosen by the operating system which is > likely what you are referring to as in the 32000 range. > > the behavior you describe is consistent with a nat or a > firewall that builds dynamic rules that assumes vic will > receive packets on the same port that it sends them from. > > for example, if the remote person joins your quickbridge on > port 50186, they start sending packets from source port > 32456 (or some other port chosen by their operating system, > but not port 50186). upon seeing these packets, the nat or > firewall installs a rule to forward packets from source port > 50186 on the quickbridge addressed to destination port 32456 > back to the remote participant. however, quickbridge is > sending packets to destination port 50186 so they never reach > the remote site. > > probably the easiest way to verify that this is the problem > is to rebuild vic with the attached patch and run the > modified version at the remote site. or if you have openmash > vic installed, you can just add the flag "-rtptv" to the vic > command line to get the same effect. > > -Andrew > >

1 0

Re: [AG-TECH] Unicast issues with vic/rat
by Andrew Swan 26 Jan '04

26 Jan '04

Don Morton wrote: > For some reason, there are folks who are trying > to unicast in, and the end result seems to be that > "we" can see them, but they can't see us. Note > that there's no multicast involved here - in one case, > the bridge is simply being used as a "rendezvous point" > for two unicast streams, but the same problems occur - > I seem to be able to see/hear the remote site, but they > can't see/hear me. > > [...] > > My vague understanding of vic/rat, used with the QuickBridge, > is that the clients send UDP datagrams out to the bridge on ports > in the 50000 range, and they seem to receive UDP datagrams on > ports in the 32000 range, and it "should" be that simple. i'm not sure about rat but vic in unicast mode sends and receives on the same port, which is specified on the command line. (the ports in your example were in the 50000 range). the source port in packets sent from vic will be an "ephemeral port" chosen by the operating system which is likely what you are referring to as in the 32000 range. the behavior you describe is consistent with a nat or a firewall that builds dynamic rules that assumes vic will receive packets on the same port that it sends them from. for example, if the remote person joins your quickbridge on port 50186, they start sending packets from source port 32456 (or some other port chosen by their operating system, but not port 50186). upon seeing these packets, the nat or firewall installs a rule to forward packets from source port 50186 on the quickbridge addressed to destination port 32456 back to the remote participant. however, quickbridge is sending packets to destination port 50186 so they never reach the remote site. probably the easiest way to verify that this is the problem is to rebuild vic with the attached patch and run the modified version at the remote site. or if you have openmash vic installed, you can just add the flag "-rtptv" to the vic command line to get the same effect. -Andrew

1 0