[mythtv] New Protocol Development

xavier hervy xavier.hervy at bluebottle.com
Thu Sep 25 15:35:40 UTC 2008

On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 19:43 +0100, Simon Kenyon wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-09-23 at 13:12 +1000, Glenn wrote:
> > - Upnp has been worked on, but is simply too 'heavy' to be used as the
> > primary protocol, so will likely remain as an 'extra' protocol
> > - XML-based protocols or similar are likely to also be too 'heavy', and
> > parsing will therefore be too CPU intensive for low power systems and so
> > on. New protocol must be easy on the processor!
> it cannot be that it is too hard to implement as it already is used by
> myth
> or that it consumes too much bandwidth becuase it is an XML based design
> so i'm curious why a standard, documented protocol is "too heavy"?

I do agree, for my phone point of view, upnp is much less heavy that if
it had to use mythprotocol. For the client point of view, upnp is fairly
light, if I take the recording list as an example, upnp allow to ask for
N recordings when mythprotocol retrieved all recordings, and the client
can also ask what field are required or not... 
I might be wrong about mythprotocol thought

More information about the mythtv-dev mailing list