2011/3/29 Dena Dragos <[email protected]>: > Greetings! > > My name is Dragos, a year 3 student at the Polytechnic University of > Bucharest, Computer Science Faculty. > > I finally got the time to > work on the architecture of my proposal. The architecture is formed > around "4 - Network Inventory - next generation". It's obviously not > the final version, but I think it's a good idea to put it here and > discuss suggestions and potential flaws in my view so I can adapt it > for my final proposal. The document can be viewed at [2]. I would > greatly appreciate if you got the time to read it and give me some > feedback. > > At the moment, some parts are left undecided: > * What exact measures should the Device Sensor do: I would like to > hear your suggestions about what you would think would be useful here. > * How exactly the UI will be organised: I usually dedicate a lot of > time for this and I am very open to feedback when I will do the UI > prototyping. > * The protocol which will be used for communication between agents. > Anyway, the protocol should allow extension if new features should be > added. >
You obviously put a good effort on that proposal, congrats. But I'm worried about the probability of accomplishing this proposal considering this is only the architecture. The way I see your proposal, I would argue that it is better to focus on one of its elements: Umit Agent Daemon. This actually is your main element, if I'm not mistaken. The UI is very important but if this other piece doesn't work well, I don't think the UI will be able to compensate for it -- what I'm trying to say here: don't worry too much (yet) about the UI if you can do a good project on this daemon. So.. focusing on the Umit Agent Daemon: The last Figure on your proposal seems to propose a way too big daemon. If you had 10 monitoring modules, would they all be inside every daemon ? That doesn't seem right to me. Maybe each daemon is different from the other, but this doesn't seem clear based on your proposal. Also, the argument of running each monitoring module in its own thread didn't (and other parts that involve threads) didn't seem totally necessary -- some form of pooling or asynchronous notifications wouldn't be enough ? Now about the communication protocol I would consider selecting one that is relatively safe. Can't a "simple" HTTPS work ? I hope this helps you in some way, Regards, -- -- Guilherme H. Polo Goncalves ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Create and publish websites with WebMatrix Use the most popular FREE web apps or write code yourself; WebMatrix provides all the features you need to develop and publish your website. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ms-webmatrix-sf _______________________________________________ Umit-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/umit-devel
