[DGD] networking/beginner comments

[bart at wotf.org]

To be a bit more specific:

'vanilla' dgd does not allow making outgoing tcp connections.
It also doesn't allow sending udp packets to hosts that didn't first send an
udp packet themselves that has to meet a challange.

Bart

On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 21:01:13 -0700 (PDT), Noah Gibbs wrote
> Felix is against the driver being able to initiate outgoing 
> connections, for security reasons.  "Networking support" is a bit of 
> an exaggeration of what he opposes :-)
> 
>   LPCSSH gives SSH support, which is nice.  There's already 
> perfectly good binary port support in general -- Phantasmal even 
> uses that for telnet, and just uses DGD telnet support for a backup 
> "in case of emergency" admin port.
> 
>   As long as you don't need outgoing network connections, or a 
> protocol that requires them (InterMUD3, active-mode FTP), vanilla 
> DGD is fine.  It's outgoing connections that would require an 
> external daemon.
> 
> --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Shentino <shentino at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > From: Shentino <shentino at gmail.com>
> > Subject: Re: [DGD] networking/beginner comments
> > To: "All about Dworkin's Game Driver" <dgd at dworkin.nl>
> > Date: Friday, July 24, 2009, 7:15 PM
> > I haven't figured out how to do so
> > yet, but apparently using the LPCSSH
> > package can provide ALMOST foolproof networking
> > functionality with vanilla
> > DGD.
> > 
> > For me, the tricky part is having the external daemon
> > properly authenticate
> > itself to the LPC layer.
> > 
> > A daemon though would be the ultimate in forward
> > compatibility.  Felix
> > remains opposed to any official networking support in the
> > driver itself.
> > From what I gather, the subject has been the source of many
> > debates and
> > flame wars, so I'd consider it verboten territory to
> > venture into detail
> > about.
> > 
> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2009 at 5:06 PM, <bart at wotf.org>
> > wrote:
> > 
> > > On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:35:56 -0700 (PDT), Noah Gibbs
> > wrote
> > > > Yes, that could be done.  There was talk
> > (but no action) awhile
> > > > back about the idea of having an external server
> > that allowed
> > > > outgoing network connections with vanilla DGD,
> > for instance.  But I
> > > > think the consensus was that you're better off
> > just using DGD
> > > > patched with the network package.
> > >
> > > My obviously biased opinion is that it is the fastest
> > way.. but rather
> > > incompatible with dgdmp :)
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > >   If you *do* use the network
> > package, you could get the protocol
> > > > you describe entirely at the LPC level rather
> > than needing an
> > > > external server.  So then the question is
> > what does the protocol do
> > > > and how does it look?  Having an inter-DGD
> > protocol is reasonable,
> > > > but you'd have to figure out some use for it
> > before people are
> > > > likely to spend time building it :-)
> > >
> > > It quite depends on what you want indeed.
> > >
> > > I use a protocol based on what is in use on the
> > intermud 3 network to
> > > synchronize things like mail between copies of my mud,
> > and it is very easy
> > > to
> > > extend that to other things that involve the exchange
> > of lpc data between
> > > different instances of dgd. Doing something useful
> > with that is an entirely
> > > different matter.
> > >
> > > Bart.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > --- On Fri, 7/24/09, Blake Arnold <BArnold at cartonservice.com>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > From: Blake Arnold <BArnold at cartonservice.com>
> > > > > Subject: [DGD] networking/beginner comments
> > > > > To: "'dgd at dworkin.nl'"
> > <dgd at dworkin.nl>
> > > > > Date: Friday, July 24, 2009, 11:59 AM
> > > > > Hello, since this is my first post
> > > > > here I would like to say HI! So now that
> > that is over please
> > > > > excuse my stupidity on some topics, I am
> > still a beginner on
> > > > > a lot of them.
> > > > >
> > > > > From what I have read so far on attempts to
> > extend the DGD
> > > > > driver's networking functionality the
> > approach is always to
> > > > > edit the DGD code to include this
> > functionality. It may be
> > > > > the fastest route to accomplish the same end
> > result however
> > > > > I fail to see the need to take this
> > route.  Has anyone
> > > > > ever attempted to use the existing DGD
> > functionality to
> > > > > build a communication layer above the DGD
> > driver that is
> > > > > capable of communication between multiple
> > DGD processes'?
> > > > > Essentially creating a non-verbose
> > (high-level)
> > > > > communications language. To top it off the
> > communication
> > > > > would be Object Oriented would it not?(if
> > done properly),
> > > > > Does that mean that our created
> > communication layer is also
> > > > > independent from the underlying layers (in
> > the idea that as
> > > > > long as the 'communication' that is received
> > is the same
> > > > > that was sent, it's irrelevant how it got
> > from one point to
> > > > > the other).
> > > > >
> > > > > And that will finish off my rambling. I'm
> > interested to see
> > > > > what other opinions are on the topic. Anyway
> > I see the DGD
> > > > > driver and the kernel lib as a very nice
> > piece of work my
> > > > > kudo's go to the creators.
> > > > >
> > > > > BA
> > > > > ___________________________________________
> > > > > https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ___________________________________________
> > > > https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Created with Open WebMail at http://www.bartsplace.net/
> > > Read my weblog at http://soapbox.bartsplace.net/
> > >
> > > ___________________________________________
> > > https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
> > >
> > ___________________________________________
> > https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd
> >
> 
> ___________________________________________
> https://mail.dworkin.nl/mailman/listinfo/dgd


--
Created with Open WebMail at http://www.bartsplace.net/
Read my weblog at http://soapbox.bartsplace.net/