Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:08 PM, David Ashley wrote: > > Here are the requirements for a common library (Windows or Linux) which > handles both IPv4 and IPv6. > > ... > 2. A Windows server socket must use the setsockopt API to set the > IPV6_V6ONLY option to zero before binding the socket to an address. This > option is zero by default on all OSs except Windows and BSD. > My one suggestion is to do this internally, don't make the user do it. Just document that the default is 0, period. Then if a Windows user wants to change the default through setsockopt, she can. -- Mark Miesfeld -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
I have done some research and here is how IPv6 works out for Windows. Any version of Windows from Vista forward is fully compatible with the Linux APIs and functionality (with one minor exception easily handled in a common library, see below). Here are the requirements for a common library (Windows or Linux) which handles both IPv4 and IPv6. 1. IP addresses must be in IPv6 format when passed to/from the APIs. DNS names are handled by the internal APIs and converted to IPv6 format. 2. A Windows server socket must use the setsockopt API to set the IPV6_V6ONLY option to zero before binding the socket to an address. This option is zero by default on all OSs except Windows and BSD. So far these are all the OS requirements I have uncovered. If this holds, then I think we can create an IPvs library that can be used by all the Windows versions we currently support. Please note that does NOT include WindowsXP or Windows2000! The WindowsXP winsock library is NOT compatible with the Linux libraries and there is not really any support for IPv6 on Windows2000. So if we are in agreement I will start on the design for a common library that supports IPv4 and IPv6 which will be a part of a future ooRexx release. David Ashley -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
I kinda like Mike's suggestion, to have a new set of functions to
support IP6. Now if the newer IP6 stuff can work correctly in IP4 or
IP6 then I think we have a winner. Existing stuff would continue to work
under IP4, and when an applications code is converted to use the new IP6
functions it might still work in an IP4 only environment. Have a newer
set of functions also addresses Mark's comment of being more object
oriented, rather than "procedural"...
That way I do not have to change the ooRexx programs that I have already
written that use IP4.
When I want to support IP6, I can modify the code as needed to make use
of the newer IP6 support. With separate libraries, as a designer, I can
choose which way I want to go
I see some problems with requiring a newer version of ".net", because I
know of a number of companies that are not ready to convert to newer
releases beyond WINXP, even though they will not have any official
"support". Sometimes, this is a financial issue (new hardware, new
software, training, etc.), and in other cases it is because they do not
have the staff to oversee an orderly conversion.
Requiring a newer version of .NET might make some applications to be not
available on an older system and/or a older application to not be
available on a newer version of Windows. You also have the "special"
case of anybody who uses WINXP under a virtual machine to support
applications that have not been converted to a newer Windows environment
(or that are not available under Linux).
Compatability issues can be, and frequently are, complex - For Instance,
I have found a number of little applications that say they work under
Windows 8.1 - and they don't, unless the target system has a real touch
screen - particularly error message pop-up screens that are longer then
the laptop's screen height with an "OK" button at the bottom of the
window With a touch screen you can "slide" the window up, but
unless the designer provided for the old scroll bars as well, you can't
scroll the windows with your mouse or cursor buttons.
This also applies to Linux environments, which as we know, are not all
the same... i.e. Ubuntu's newer screen manager environments...
or Gnome 2 -vs- Gnome 3 -vs- KDE - vs- whatever.
My vote? consider doing the IP6 under a newer set of functions.
/s/ Bill Turner, wb4alm
On 02/11/2014 11:06 AM, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:
One of the thoughts I had before David posted the beginning of
this thread is that maybe we could use this opportunity to update
rxsock itself, so that it better uses the newish APIs and is
object orientated than rather than procedural.
Upwards-compatible could be tricky.
Maybe just add a new library ('rxsock6'?) which is unencumbered by
past history.
Mike
--
Android apps run on BlackBerry 10
Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps.
Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more.
Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
I realise that Sockets and TCP are directly related, and that UDP is not quite as related, would it be possible to provide for UDP, etc. type functionality, even if not implemented immediately? While I am not a C/C++ programmer, I have prototyped "Internet" based systems using ooRexx... I also like Mike's suggestion that the newer functions be more task oriented, but I'm not sure exactly how you would go about doing that. (I still think procedurally... ) -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
> I have very mixed emotion about the current rxsock library. > Let me just list some thoughts in no particular order. > > - The rxsock library is extremely complicated to use. You > have to really know how sockets work in order to use it. On the other hand, if you've already used sockets in (say) C, then it is a straightforward wrapper. So this might be more of a documentation issue (and changes from the way it works in C might steepen the learning curve). > There is not a high-level interface to it which is why I > wrote rxsock.cls. A high-level interface is good; fxftp.cls, for example, was a doddle to use when I had to convert from using the rxftp functions. The downside is when you need to set one of the obscure TCP/IP options (not necessary for FTP, in my experience) and it is not available in the higher-level model. > - I think there might be a big difference between Windows and > Linux users of rxsock, but I am not sure I can explain why. > It is just a feeling I have. > - Sockets are hard, and do not let anyone tell you > differently. The rxsock library hides some of that complexity > by just not allowing you access to it, like datagrams, udp, > etc. You only get access to the TCP protocol from rxsock. Not sure I follow .. UDP, etc., are not sockets, so they do not complicate sockets? > - Although IPv4 and IPv6 use mostly the same APIs, there are > differences in the data structures that are passed to those > APIs. Thus it makes it harder for the users of rxsock to > differentiate between IPv4 and IPv6 if the ooRexx function > calls stay the same since we hide the data structures from the user. Good point. > At this point I am leaning towards the creation of a class > library for sockets to support IPv4 and IPv6. This would not > replace the current rxsock library but would be made > available for the ooRexx users to migrate to eventually. I > think this could make sockets much easier to program. We > could use the rxsock.cls as a starting point to figure out > how it should be organized and what methods should be available. Maybe it should be task-oriented, and be higher-level than TCP/IP, even. TCP/IP and sockets are really quite low-level in the bigger (deeper, more complex) scheme of things. Mike -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
I have very mixed emotion about the current rxsock library. Let me just list some thoughts in no particular order. - The rxsock library is extremely complicated to use. You have to really know how sockets work in order to use it. There is not a high-level interface to it which is why I wrote rxsock.cls. - I think there might be a big difference between Windows and Linux users of rxsock, but I am not sure I can explain why. It is just a feeling I have. - Sockets are hard, and do not let anyone tell you differently. The rxsock library hides some of that complexity by just not allowing you access to it, like datagrams, udp, etc. You only get access to the TCP protocol from rxsock. - Although IPv4 and IPv6 use mostly the same APIs, there are differences in the data structures that are passed to those APIs. Thus it makes it harder for the users of rxsock to differentiate between IPv4 and IPv6 if the ooRexx function calls stay the same since we hide the data structures from the user. At this point I am leaning towards the creation of a class library for sockets to support IPv4 and IPv6. This would not replace the current rxsock library but would be made available for the ooRexx users to migrate to eventually. I think this could make sockets much easier to program. We could use the rxsock.cls as a starting point to figure out how it should be organized and what methods should be available. David Ashley -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Mike Cowlishaw wrote:
>
> Maybe just add a new library ('rxsock6'?) which is unencumbered by past
> history.
>
>
Well, that is really more of what I meant. A new extension that was
unencumbered by the original rxsock design. But one that supported both
IPv4 and IPv6.
--
Mark Miesfeld
--
Android apps run on BlackBerry 10
Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps.
Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more.
Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
One of the thoughts I had before David posted the beginning of this thread is
that maybe we could use this opportunity to update rxsock itself, so that it
better uses the newish APIs and is object orientated than rather than
procedural.
Upwards-compatible could be tricky.
Maybe just add a new library ('rxsock6'?) which is unencumbered by past history.
Mike
--
Android apps run on BlackBerry 10
Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps.
Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more.
Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now.
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
Greetings Mark, I am choosing to overlook your pointed jabs at my "Amish Computer Virus" ways. ( http://www.upperregister.com/~charlie/AmishVirus.html ) Mark Miesfeld wrote: > In addition, Rick is already concerned about people not being able to upgrade > ooRexx because of a dependency on .Net that they don't want or need. That is the heart of my concern... seems I am not alone. More and more I work with Linux systems. Thus I was not aware that MS slipped into newer editions of Windows some level of .Net runtime. Maybe it is less of an issue than I perceived from my M$ insulated bliss in the Linux world. ;-) I use Linux like IBM promised I could use OS/2 back in 1992. Today Windows programs are confined to operating in a VM instance. I turn on the VM on an as-necessary basis. Mostly I leave it off and simply operate in the OS/3 world... uuummm eeerrr LINUX! ;-) Blessings, -- Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Rick McGuire wrote: > To me, it sounds like option 4 of using IPV4 mapped to IPV6 is the > cleanest way to implement this. I'm wondering if we might want to take the > approach used with oodialog and separate the rxsock library from the > interpreter release. The Windows installer could then check the prereqs to > ensure it can be installed on that system. I'd hate for somebody to be > unable to install the entire interpreter because their system didn't have > the prereqs for something they might not even need. > > I haven't joined into the discussion much because I simply don't know much about socket programming. But, I think Rick's last point is valid, It would be a shame if some of the old dinosaurs couldn't install a newer version of ooRexx because of a dependency on a version of .Net that is a later version of what comes with the version of Windows they are using. One of the thoughts I had before David posted the beginning of this thread is that maybe we could use this opportunity to update rxsock itself, so that it better uses the newish APIs and is object orientated than rather than procedural. One possibility would be leave rxsock just as it is and take the code base use it to produce a new extension that supports both IPv4 and IPv6. This new extension could be a separate install, like ooDialog can be installed separately. Users that want IPv6 support could install it, users that didn't want IPv6 could just stick with rxsock. I'm in favor of that, but since David is pushing this, I'm perfectly fine with whatever he wants to do. -- Mark Miesfeld -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Michael Lueck wrote: > (sssiiggghh...) That is a most unfortunate situation. > Most people don't call this unfortunate, they call it progress. > > So all of a sudden, to install ooRexx, ooRexx will be dragging along .Net > onto target boxes. Bloat, bloat, bloat... > Most systems will already have .Net on them. So, nothing needs to be added. On the other hand, if you want to continue living in the previous millennium, you have no need of IPv6. There was no working IPv6 in the previous millennium. In addition, Rick is already concerned about people not being able to upgrade ooRexx because of a dependency on .Net that they don't want or need. Although we haven't hashed out the details on how to overcome that, since it is a concern, I'm sure we will arrive at some compromise there. But it will be a compromise that you will need to make. If you want and need IPv6, then you will need to use the software that supplies it. If you don't want it, then you will be able to use ooRexx, but you won't have IPv6. -- Mark Miesfeld -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
The problem is not with the APIs but with the way the libraries work underneath the APIs. The newer .Net replaces the underlying libraries. The situation may not be as bad as it sounds. I need to do more research to see what version of .Net we need and what versions were shipped with each OS and also what service packs updated. David Ashley On Tue, 2014-02-11 at 09:55 -0500, Michael Lueck wrote: > David Ashley wrote: > > Later versions of .Net replace the > > original libraries for ones that work like Linux (99% at least). > > > (sssiiggghh...) That is a most unfortunate situation. > > So all of a sudden, to install ooRexx, ooRexx will be dragging along .Net > onto target boxes. Bloat, bloat, bloat... > > So within .Net, MS did mapping between the native TCP/IP stack that comes > with the Windows OS and publishes an API that is more similar to what Linux > natively supplies? > > Aaaahhh... and Mono is an OSS/FS implementation of .Net... so perhaps ooRexx > could harvest intellectual property from Mono, thereby bypass .Net as a > dependency? > > Blessings, > -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
David Ashley wrote: > Later versions of .Net replace the > original libraries for ones that work like Linux (99% at least). (sssiiggghh...) That is a most unfortunate situation. So all of a sudden, to install ooRexx, ooRexx will be dragging along .Net onto target boxes. Bloat, bloat, bloat... So within .Net, MS did mapping between the native TCP/IP stack that comes with the Windows OS and publishes an API that is more similar to what Linux natively supplies? Aaaahhh... and Mono is an OSS/FS implementation of .Net... so perhaps ooRexx could harvest intellectual property from Mono, thereby bypass .Net as a dependency? Blessings, -- Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library
There is a native TCP/IP API for Windows. However, older versions of Windows do not have the TCP/IP functionality we need, some of the APIs work differently than on Linux. Later versions of .Net replace the original libraries for ones that work like Linux (99% at least). David Ashley On Mon, 2014-02-10 at 22:58 -0500, Michael Lueck wrote: > David Ashley wrote: > > 1. As always, the Windows implementation of IPv6 will cause us some > > pain. We really need to use the latest version of .Net > > > IPv6 within Windows does not have a native C/C++ interface, only .Net? > > Blessings, > -- Android apps run on BlackBerry 10 Introducing the new BlackBerry 10.2.1 Runtime for Android apps. Now with support for Jelly Bean, Bluetooth, Mapview and more. Get your Android app in front of a whole new audience. Start now. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=124407151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk ___ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
