On Wed, May 4, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Jon Cooper <[email protected]> wrote: > - plan on using shared secret authentication schemes like PLAIN or > DIGEST-MD5. expect administrators to use plaintext password databases.
I bet most administrators would prefer to have an encrypted password file. > - build an evented server modelled after beanstalkd, reusing net.c / > sock-*.c / sd-daemon.* / srv.c and following the patterns of conn.c / > prot.c. [1] Ok, but a great deal of the code in beanstalkd (especially prot.c) is messy and disorganized. I'm in the process of cleaning it up, bit by bit, as time permits. > - modify beanstalkd to have a switch that causes it to listen to a PF_UNIX > socket bound to a path. recvmsg() instead of accept(). Perfect. You might also want to think about modifying net.c to properly handle a unix socket inherited from systemd. > [2] My first cut of a wire protocol: > ... This looks great. I have a small objection to using the word "auth", because it's ambiguous (it could be short for "authentication" or "authorization"). Clients that intend to pipeline commands will have to stall until getting AUTH_OK, and probably won't be able to do much of any pipelining at all during authentication. I'm not sure if that needs to be explained as part of the protocol spec. kr -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "beanstalk-talk" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/beanstalk-talk?hl=en.
