Re: [Spice-devel] RFC: Media redirection for Spice remote computing solution, an event for FOSDEM'14, Virtualization dev room

2013-12-02 Thread Fedor Lyakhov
Hi Steven, On Mon, Dec 2, 2013 at 7:14 PM, Steven Newbury wrote: > On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 18:16 +0400, Fedor Lyakhov wrote: >> Thanks, David! >> >> We have an internal proof of concept based on private VoIP softphone, >> Thrift over TCP as RPC and Google WebRTC as Media Engine - and the >> softpho

Re: [Spice-devel] RFC: Media redirection for Spice remote computing solution, an event for FOSDEM'14, Virtualization dev room

2013-12-02 Thread Steven Newbury
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 18:16 +0400, Fedor Lyakhov wrote: > Thanks, David! > > We have an internal proof of concept based on private VoIP softphone, > Thrift over TCP as RPC and Google WebRTC as Media Engine - and the > softphone is capable of audio calls and remote control of audio > devices. So no

Re: [Spice-devel] RFC: Media redirection for Spice remote computing solution, an event for FOSDEM'14, Virtualization dev room

2013-12-02 Thread Fedor Lyakhov
Thanks, David! We have an internal proof of concept based on private VoIP softphone, Thrift over TCP as RPC and Google WebRTC as Media Engine - and the softphone is capable of audio calls and remote control of audio devices. So now we're confident it can work. We hope to create open-source protot

Re: [Spice-devel] RFC: Media redirection for Spice remote computing solution, an event for FOSDEM'14, Virtualization dev room

2013-12-02 Thread David Jaša
The slides are very nice and if you already have some prototype finished, it would be cool to see it in action! David Fedor Lyakhov píše v So 30. 11. 2013 v 17:11 +0400: > Hello Spice developers and users, > > I'm going to apply for FOSDEM'14 Virtualization dev room with event > "Media Redirect

Re: [Spice-devel] VM pools and libgovirt

2013-12-02 Thread Christophe Fergeau
On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 10:32:03PM -0500, i iordanov wrote: > 0) Do you require the asynchronous functions before I submit my changes? Would be better, but I can live without it/add it myself, don't worry ;) > > 1) Would a patch against libgovirt 0.30 be acceptable, or would you require > a patc