Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[salsbst1]

It would be extremely beneficial to separate the library server (that which knows what files I have and which categories are in in the Media Library, etc.) from the file server (the thing that serves up media files for playback).

In other words, can't clients be given a UNC path to the media file (so that they can access the file directly), rather than dragging all of the data through the library server?

This way, though of us with linux file server could enjoy all of the benefits of Media Center without having to drag all of the bits from our file server through our MC library server and then down to the client.

Even those who do not use linux, but who do have a file server distinct from their home theater server, would benefit.

I can't believe that this would be difficult to implement -- all of the pieces are there, the client mode of MC just needs a little tweak.  Well actually, I'm sure there are a couple of other bits to work out, but it would really make a difference for a few of us.

Please?

[JimH]

I can't believe that this would be difficult to implement

Hi Stuart,
Want a job?

Jim

[salsbst1]

Want a job?

No, thanks.  I quit playing hockey in high school.  Ever since then my taste for really cold weather seems to have been diminishing.

The application already knows how to play files from a file server -- it does so when I don't run in client/server mode.  The only problem is that once you are in client/server mode, the client is forced to get its file streams from the server node, rather than just playing the file from the file server. 

Serve the library, but not the media files.

[JimH]

You wouldn't be able to do file conversion in that case.  Conversion is important when people have lossless libraries but bandwidths that won't support lossless.

Firewalls might also be a problem.

The cold weather here in Minnesota makes us doubly appreciative of our spring, summer, and fall.  None better anywhere I've ever been.  And housing doesn't cost half a paycheck.

[salsbst1]

I'm talking about a LAN situation.  I recognize that streaming is the only viable option for internet sharing.

Conversion wouldn't be supported since there is no streaming server.  Firewalls -- well, the user would be left to their own devices -- but the existing client/server streaming system is good for firewalls and bandwidth-limited situations.  An extra network hop between file server and streaming server is nothing compared to the act of getting the bits across the internet -- in other words, it's worth it.

I am not proposing to do away with the streaming capabilities! They are serving an important function. 

This same arrangement, however, is suboptimal in a LAN environment where the extra network hop is doubling the network traffic needlessly.

I just wish that a checkbox would be added (to the client side in the Library Manager Window) to allow us to switch from streaming mode to direct file server access to the media files.

The client already knows how to read the files and already has the path to the files.  The server probably doesen't need to be modified at all, and the client just needs to be told to read from the file path rather than initiating a streaming operation.

Stay warm.

P.S.  It's only 4 degrees F warmer in DC than it is in Minneapolis at the moment!

[Tim Harvey]

I ran across this thread while searching for Library Server features.

I completely agree that MC should have an option to allow the client to directly access a file via LAN vs streaming through the MC server.

I also have a setup where my music files are on a NAS and the MC server is on a standalone headless embedded system yet the MC clients also have access to the NAS.

The MC clients see the file path as: m01p:/ipaddr:port/\\server\share\...
It would be nice to be able to tell the MC client to remove the MC server from the filenames and simply access them from the LAN.  This way, a client that is accessing via LAN can be configured that way, yet a client accessing via Internet can stream through the server to allow conversion.

Please think about adding this feature!

Tim

[Bill Kearney]

It would have to be some sort of client-side, per-server configuration option.  That way a client that's on the local subnet could follow the UNC path.  But at the same time, a VPN client that, from a logical network standpoint, appears to be 'local' can opt to use streaming instead.  As in, a PC right there off the same ethernet wire/wifi goes direct while one tunnelled in through a PPTP or other VPN link would use stream conversions.  They both might appear to have the same IP subnet but are on radically different connections.

There's no easy way to reliably detect how "local" a client is to the source.  Note that I'm speaking of across-the-board "reliable" ways to detect it.  Things like latency, type of connection and the like are all things that can be programmatically discovered but it's never accurate enough not to be trouble.  Thus letting it be a client-side option based on the server being selected seems like a wise approach.

Tangentally there's also a potential rats nest of security issues to consider.  That a server has the ability to see a given UNC path doesn't mean the client can.  And it'd become a real tangle of complexities to get into some sort of negotiation for the server to try and figure it out.  It'd probably end up being some sort of "can you read this UNC path?  no, ok then here's a stream."  Sounds nice but prolly a hassle to code.  This even assuming you WANT to be telling clients the name of the UNC path.  Sometimes it would be considered a bad idea to let the client know just where the file resides.  One reason might be the resources are expected to move and it would be a problem to go having a ton of client accesses depend on the 'wrong' UNC path.  Or you just don't want them to know the files reside on a given box (perhaps because it's not supposed to have them but all that free disk space was just soooo tempting...)

Anyway, the server would need to have config options on how to share out tracks, either by stream only, by path or both.  Then the clients would need to be able to configure how to use the server, paths because it's 'known' to be local, streams because it's not or that's only what's offered. 

[Tim Harvey]

No need to make this complex.  I only see a need to allow a configuration on the client (if its easier, add a configuration at the server but then you would have the limitation of not being able to do both stream and/or UNC). 

The client already sees the full UNC filenames just with the streaming server protocol tacked on the front of them.  All the client needs to do is strip that part off and the files come off the network.  This is just a simple replace filter on the filename!