Accessing remote devices
rml at ximian.com
Sun Mar 14 17:42:48 EET 2004
On Tue, 2004-02-03 at 16:19 +1100, Brad Hards wrote:
> I think it might be better to bridge HAL (or perhaps at the D-BUS level?) to
> an existing, working, secure, well-designed service discovery system. Lots of
> people have done service discovery, mostly not very well. Normal complaints
> are that the service discovery system doesn't provide the right level of
> functionality, or that it causes way to much network traffic.
> I suggest Service Location Protocol v2 (RFC2608, RFC2609, RFC2610, RFC2614 and
> a few others).
So you are saying basically what I said, except that HAL itself should
listen for the service discovery messages? I guess my opinion of that
depends on what else the service discovery system has to do.
If it has other responsibilities (which I suspect it does), I would
prefer it be separate, and bridge to D-BUS, which HAL can then
More information about the xdg