similar to: What to do when speex_jitter_get(...) has no buffer to return

Displaying 20 results from an estimated 10000 matches similar to: "What to do when speex_jitter_get(...) has no buffer to return"

2007 Mar 18
2
Problem with the svn jitter buffer
Since r12660, the speex_jitter_get with high latency doesn?t works, I have no sound. Before this release, the speex_jitter_get works in all conditions. speex_jitter_get return void, then I cannot know the reason of this problem. Regards Ouss -----Original Message----- From: Jean-Marc Valin [mailto:jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca] Sent: dimanche 18 mars 2007 23:07 To: Ouss Cc:
2005 Jun 06
1
Jitter buffer usage
Dear all. Questions regarding VoIP implementation and the use of the Speex jitter buffer, if I may: Am I right in my understanding that the Speex jitter buffer implementation is used only on the receiving end of a network VoIP stream? 1) The sender would sample+encode+timestamp packets/frames of speex data and send via UDP to receiver. UDP packet would be constructed as: [TIMESTAMP][Speex
2005 Sep 18
2
How does the jitter buffer "catch up"?
Thank you for a very good explanation which shed light on some of the questions that I had after reading the source code. Reading your text however, I wonder if I'm perhaps missing an important point on the proper use of the jitter buffer: ... > Now, clearly, if early_ratio is high and late_ratio is very > low, the buffer is buffering more than it needs to; it will > skip a frame
2007 Mar 18
2
Problem with the svn jitter buffer
I use the speex version of your jitter, and in speex_jitter_get, you always call the jitter_buffer_update_delay. -----Original Message----- From: Jean-Marc Valin [mailto:jean-marc.valin@usherbrooke.ca] Sent: dimanche 18 mars 2007 13:06 To: Ouss Cc: speex-dev@xiph.org Subject: Re: [Speex-dev] Problem with the svn jitter buffer > I think that the new Jitter Buffer have a problem. > >
2006 May 02
2
New jitter.c, bug in speex_jitter_get?
Hi. After changing my code to construct a JitterBufferPacket and passing that to speex_jitter_put, my program works with the new jitter buffer using the wrapper functions (speex_jitter_* instead of the new jitter_buffer_*). However, a lot of warning: did you forget to call jitter_buffer_tick() by any chance? is displayed. Looking at speex_jitter_get, the logic seems to be as follows: if
2005 Sep 18
3
How does the jitter buffer "catch up"?
Is is possible to give a short hint about how the jitter buffer would "catch up" when network condition have been bad and then get better? I'm using the jitter buffer with success now, but sometimes I have a long delay that's caused by bad network conditions and then later when the conditions get better, I would think we would want the audio to gradually catch up with real-time
2005 Sep 22
0
How does the jitter buffer "catch up"?
Hello, The way you describe how the jitter buffer should be implemented makes me wonder: How does the jitter buffer works when there is no transmission? Let's say my "output" thread gets a speex frame from the jitter buffer every 20ms. What happen when there is no frame that arrived on the socket? No frames at all for a pretty long time (ie many seconds). This is my case because I
2004 Nov 15
2
Jitter buffer
Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >>I believe it is adaptive, but no, I haven't used it, because it's >>coupled only to the speex codec. We're working on a generic >>application and codec-independent jitter buffer algorithm, for use in >>asterisk and iaxclient (at least). Some information is available at
2006 May 03
3
New jitter.c, bug in speex_jitter_get?
>> After changing my code to construct a JitterBufferPacket and passing that >> to speex_jitter_put, my program works with the new jitter buffer using the >> wrapper functions (speex_jitter_* instead of the new jitter_buffer_*). > > Oops, I forgot to make sure I keep the API stable for the old buffer. > Any thoughts on the change (revert or continue as is)? Well, I
2007 Mar 17
2
Problem with the svn jitter buffer
Hello, I think that the new Jitter Buffer have a problem. It works perfectly when I call the speex_jitter_put every 20ms (on my lan) but in other case (with big latency on Internet connexion), it doesn't works. The old version is OK in all cases. Hope it will helps. Thanks Ouss -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL:
2005 Jun 06
1
RTP and jitter buffer relationship
Good question. I'm coming to the conclusion that using plain UDP and "home-grown" packet construction for transmitting the speex data (with timestamp/sequence counter) and implementing jitter control on the receiver end is an adequate implementation for a VoIP application. Assuming of course that I don't care about any interoperability issues with other applications etc. I was
2005 Sep 18
0
How does the jitter buffer "catch up"?
> Thank you for a very good explanation which shed light on some of the > questions that I had after reading the source code. > > Reading your text however, I wonder if I'm perhaps missing an important > point on the proper use of the jitter buffer: > > ... >> Now, clearly, if early_ratio is high and late_ratio is very >> low, the buffer is buffering more than
2004 Aug 06
1
Voip Jitter Buffer
('binary' encoding is not supported, stored as-is) I'm working on a voip project with Speex and the only major design obstacle left (that I'm aware of) is the jitter buffer. Before I attempt to write something of my own I'd like to try out the jitter buffer functions in Speex's unstable release. Can anyone give me a basic run down of how the experimental jitter buffer is
2007 Mar 26
0
Problem with the svn jitter buffer
Hi Ouss, Can you test again? I think I found and fixed the problem. Jean-Marc Ouss a ?crit : > Since r12660, the speex_jitter_get with high latency doesn?t works, I have > no sound. > Before this release, the speex_jitter_get works in all conditions. > speex_jitter_get return void, then I cannot know the reason of this problem. > > Regards > > Ouss > > >
2004 Nov 16
2
Jitter buffer
Jean-Marc Valin wrote: >>OK, I'm actually about ready to start working on this now. >> >>If people in the speex community are interested in working with me on >>this, I can probably start with the speex buffer, but I imagine >>there's going to be a lot more work needed to get this where I'd like >>it to go. >> >> > >And where
2005 Apr 19
1
speex voice seems to be bit breaking over long distance.
Hi Jean, > Actually, Speex has Packet Loss Concealment (PLC) > builtin. If a packet > is missing, instead of repeating the previous one, > just try decoding by > passing NULL instead of the SpeexBits struct. > Thanks, I have made the above changes and the effect seems to be better now. > > I think jitter buffering is more correct way to > solve > > this problem
2006 May 02
0
New jitter.c, bug in speex_jitter_get?
Le mardi 02 mai 2006 ? 18:15 +0200, Thorvald Natvig a ?crit : > Hi. > > After changing my code to construct a JitterBufferPacket and passing that > to speex_jitter_put, my program works with the new jitter buffer using the > wrapper functions (speex_jitter_* instead of the new jitter_buffer_*). Oops, I forgot to make sure I keep the API stable for the old buffer. Any thoughts on
2008 Sep 13
1
Bug (and fix) for speex_jitter_buffer.c
Hi, I'd like to report a bug in speexclient/speex_jitter_buffer.c. In the function speex_jitter_get(), after the line: packet.data = data; add the line packet.len = 2048; If this variable is uninitialized, then in jitter_buffer_get() (in jitter.c), the predicate "jitter->packets[i].len > packet->len" is undetermined. When this happens, the wrong amount of
2006 May 03
2
New jitter.c, bug in speex_jitter_get?
> Perhaps, but then you need to assume that the jitterbuffer can just > throw away the data, and that limits how you can use it. In object- > oriented terms, you might want to pass objects to the JB, and then > call a destructor on them. In C terms, you may want to allocate > frames via malloc(), and then call free() on them later. You might > want to pass in
2006 May 03
2
New jitter.c, bug in speex_jitter_get?
> We just return a frame with the return value JB_DROP, which tells the > caller to drop this frame, and call jb_get again. > > When the caller is done with the jitterbuffer, it calls jb_getall() > repeatedly, until it's empty, and then it can discard all the frames. Hmm, looks a bit error-prone to me. Especially considering I still have to explain that "no, you