Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread David Ashley
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,

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Michael Lueck
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...

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread David Ashley
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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Mark Miesfeld
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:55 AM, Michael Lueck mlu...@lueckdatasystems.comwrote: (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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Mark Miesfeld
On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 3:00 PM, Rick McGuire object.r...@gmail.com 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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Michael Lueck
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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Mike Cowlishaw
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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Mark Miesfeld
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 8:06 AM, Mike Cowlishaw m...@speleotrove.com 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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread David Ashley
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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Bill Turner, WB4ALM
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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Bill Turner, WB4ALM
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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread David Ashley
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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-11 Thread Mark Miesfeld
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 12:08 PM, David Ashley w.david.ash...@gmail.comwrote: 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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-10 Thread Rick McGuire
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

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-10 Thread David Ashley
While I like option 4 there are some things that need to be checked out. For instance, will this option work when there is no set up for IPv6 on the adapter? So far I have not been able to determine that from anything I have read. I am sure there are some other things to check out as well. As to

Re: [Oorexx-devel] IPv6 rxsock Function Library

2014-02-10 Thread Michael Lueck
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, -- Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems