This has been an interesting thread and I think there are some
good points to be made. But it seems to me that the general
thinking has been so 1990's :-) Suppose we bring it up to the
early 2000's.
The requirements I've distilled are:
1. easy networking
2. secure
3. automated discovery of peers
4. automated synchronization
5. coexistence with other network services
6. off-the-shelf infrastructure when possible (don't reinvent plumbing)
7. portable to old OSes
In the 1990's we would have built a client/server system where you would
need to know the address of the server and the port of the service. In
the
new millennium we would use peer-to-peer networking. There are quite
a wide variety of these and they are most popular in the gaming and
file sharing community. But that is just a small part of the potential
market.
I'd encourage Wayne to look at the more advanced peer-to-peer
infrastructures on the net. My personal bias is JXTA
http://www.jxta.org
but there are others. O'Reilly has published a book on the topic which
seems to cover the topic from a high level quite well.
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/peertopeer/
You can read chapter one from the above URL for a decent overview.
-- richard
On Jun 28, 2004, at 7:55 AM, Steve Gorecki wrote:
With the power of Writelog and it's networking, I have a suggestion in
improving the networking flexability of WL.
We have all seen (and many have posted) issues around the networking
of WL, and with various O/S, we keep hitting those NetDDE stumbling
blocks often enough that something needs to be looked at. After a
successful Field Day here (with some minor network/RF problems), I
think now is a good time to make some suggestions. These may have been
made before (maybe not recently...), but I think it is worth another
kick at the tires so to speak.
Now I know Wayne is busy enough, with updates and various new
contests, but the power of networking WL successfully is one of its
strengths. Let's fix or get rid of the problems of passwords, NETDDE,
etc. once and for all.
What I am suggesting is to go back to basics and set up WL to use
TCP/IP addressing and port numbers. I have seen many applications do
this, and NT security is never an issue (because connection does not
use MS security). In fact, following this suggestion may even enable
the internet logging of WL without the need for a web server running
custom Java.
Basically, I would suggest picking a free port number (high number
such as in the 5000 range, 8000 range, whatever), and have WL connect
by IP address only. To register to accept network connections, all WL
does is open the port and listen on it for incoming connections. The
"Link to network" menu would require the destination IP address (and
same fixed port number) to connect. No user ID required, no domain or
workgroup model to worry about.
Now the drawback to this is that we may need to set up fixed IP
addresses for our WL machines. To overcome this, the "Register to
accept network connections" menu could have a table of acceptable
incoming IP addresses or a range of addresses to accept. For example,
register for network, accepting incoming IP range of 192.168.1.100 to
192.168.1.150. By using the port number, this ensures that it is
another WL computer that we are looking for. Keep the same station ID
setup (of course, for logging), but you could now drop the station
names (no more Netbios). The WL station that is doing the "Link to
Network" can specify an IP address, or a range of addresses to scan
and connect to. Imagine that, connecting to more than one WL station
with one command (ie: scan range of 192.168.1.100 to 150 as above) and
connect to all if accepted.
The benefit of using IP addresses (and port#), is that now we would be
able to network across the internet directly to other stations (club
stations take note...) With proper DSL or cable router configuration,
I could connect my WL station to someone in another state (or province
in my case). No need for the complicated Tomcat web server setup (and
hardware). Most ISPs will pass incoming port numbers over 1024 (some
allow all). So, if WL could say "open port #5xxx and listen for any
incoming WL connect", anyone else running WL could connect to my
station. The WL "register to accept network" menu with a list of
"acceptable" addresses would prevent unwanted connections. (or use
existing WL registration key to verify same callsign stations like
those found in FD)
Well, that is about it. I hope Wayne will consider this option
carefully. Why, it would even open the possibility of non-MS O/S
participating in a WL network, if WL is ever ported to anything else
(listening MAC and Linux users?). The main idea here is to ensure that
WL would become free of MS security issues that will keep coming up,
especially as new releases of Windows come out with even more
security.
Please send reply comments to this newsgroup. Thanks
73
Steve
VE3CWJ
_________________________________________________________________
MSN Premium with Virus Guard and Firewall* from McAfee® Security : 2
months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/
prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/
enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
WriteLog on the web: http://www.writelog.com/
_______________________________________________
WriteLog mailing list
WriteLog@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
WriteLog on the web: http://www.writelog.com/
|