Hello Adam, Phil, >>>>> Adam Walling wrote:
> It would be nice to standardize this with however TightVNC is > handling it; let's discuss with Constantin. > > #define rfbExplicitDisconnect 0x51 Unfortunately, this will not work in TightVNC, because simply adding a new message would break RFB protocol compatibility. In TightVNC, there is a mechanism allowing to register new protocol messages in 100% compatible way (via "capabilities"). When both sides of the connection (server and viewer) support TightVNC protocol extensions, the server tells the client which extended messages it supports. This allows client and server negotiate their capabilities and use only those messages that are guaranteed to be supported by the other side. We plan to implement the message similar to rfbExplicitDisconnect via capabilities mechanism so that the server would send it only when it knows this message can be used by the client. And we use 4-byte message codes in TightVNC for non-standard messages (where the first byte is always the same and is registered in the standard RFB protocol specification). If you are interested to make the message TightVNC-compatible, we will be glad to cooperate, but we are interested only in solutions that would work via capabilities and thus would not break compatibility with standard RFB clients and servers. -- Best Regards, Constantin ----------------------------------------------------------------- TightVNC Weh site: http://www.tightvnc.com/ Follow TightVNC on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/tightvnc ----------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list VNC-List@realvnc.com To remove yourself from the list visit: http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
