<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:<br>
<blockquote cite="mid20040625181618.GB24685@lkcl.net" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Fri, Jun 25, 2004 at 10:13:08AM -0400, Havoc Pennington wrote:
<pre wrap="">And I don't believe this claim is true. The reason there are tons of IPC
systems out there is that there are different tradeoffs to be made.
and i believe that dce/rpc is, for the description that your project
gives ("fast", "message-based" etc) an existing system that is
already proven, already does what you are attempting to reinvent.
... why waste it?
i'm quite happy to write a plugin authentication module for you,
to do SASL, if that helps [as i mentioned in my initial post,
all encryption systems have been stripped out of dce 1.1 aka
freedce but the hooks have been left in]
if you like i can come up with some digital signing and/or encryption
scheme that SASL can use.
i'm also happy to write you a unix-domain-socket transport layer
plugin, too [again, as i mentioned in my initial post, there is
evidence of companies like DEC adding their own transport layers
in e.g. DECNet 3.0 so it's pretty easy to add new transports].
that'd at least get you started.
What do you think Havoc? Would it be worthwhile to take him up on his
_If_ he's right and this could be used by DBus it could possibly safe
you a lot of time implementing the proposed marshalling communication
Or have you already made up your mind that this is not a viable option?<br>
Sorry if I sound pushy, just curious :-)<br>