Hi Is that possible that Felix maintains a UPnP/DLNA implement? I mean, not just fetching CyberLink's code, but take control the whole life cycle.
And someone has already created a OSGi UPnP bundle with Cling: http://code.google.com/p/bwgz-org/ Regards LongkerDandy On Sun, Jan 9, 2011 at 7:48 PM, Francesco Furfari < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi Jackson, > > I think that we should not miss the opportunity to propose requirements > that facilitate the effective use of UPnP Spec, for example to build DLNA > compliant products. > > The new specification could include new conventions that can be easly > adopted by UPnP implementations. > The Patrick's solution follows this line, but in my opinion it is a > vertical solution to solve only the DLNA's requirements. > Moreover it helps only to export DLNA devices, but nothing is stated about > the importing of DLNA devices. > > I don't know the DLNA guidelines to say whether the current OSGi > specification is well suited, but I guess DLNA is built on top of the > "Non-standard vendor extensions" mechanism provided by UPnP, and such > mechanism is not covered by OSGi, nor there is an alternative way to > access/provide to the XML description of a UPnP Device. For example, the > Felix UPnP implementation provides an interface to retrieve the URL of a > UPnPDevice (or UPnPService) by UUID but it is not an standard solution. > > So I think there are open issues it would be worth to discuss ;-) > Is there a way to access to the DLNA guidelines/recommendation ? > Can you provide us some pointer? > > Best regards, > Francesco > > > > > On 08/01/2011 20.47, Jackson, Bruce wrote: > >> I am the Chair of the DLNA Software Certification task force in DLNA, and >> have also produced a stack for DLNA based around the OSGi R4 UPnP >> specification. DLNA does not require anything more than is already defined >> in the existing OSGi specification, however, the current implementation of >> the driver has several problems which will result in non-compliance with >> DLNA specifications. >> >> In general, OSGi has defined interfaces for companions services rather >> than specific implementations, and its the implmentation that is the >> problem here. In our implementation of the OSGi R4 UPnP interfaces, we >> have used the approach set out by Patrik to allow the DLNA headers to be >> added to the device Dictionary. >> >> On 08/01/2011 03:31, "LongkerDandy"<[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi >>> >>> I'm not a expert on UPnP/DLNA. >>> >>> I hope OSGi could include/consider the DLNA implement, since it already >>> have >>> UPnP. >>> >>> And due to the fact we don't have a comprehensive open source Java >>> UPnP/DLNA >>> implement, we may need some work around. >>> A bridge is just my quick thought ;D, I think the separation of different >>> modules will be better. >>> >>> Patrick in (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2730) already >>> point >>> out some important facts. >>> But I'm not sure the change to the xml generation would be enough. >>> I didn't purchase the DLNA Guidelines, from what I see DLNA also define >>> different discover method. >>> And additional devices like device for mobiles. >>> >>> As a Java developer, I find it difficult to make a dlna app. >>> Since lacking of decent library and dlna charge a fee for their document >>> and >>> test case. >>> >>> Thanks for your concern >>> LongkerDandy >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 8:57 PM, Kai Hackbarth >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>> Hi all, >>>> >>>> the OSGi Residential Expert Group is currently collecting requirements >>>> for >>>> the new specification. If you let us know the requirements, we can work >>>> on >>>> an update of the UPnP specification. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Kai >>>> >>>> Am 07.01.2011 um 13:47 schrieb Francesco Furfari: >>>> >>>> Dear LongkerDandy, >>>>> >>>>> I think the right place to ask about updates of the UPnP >>>>> >>>> Specification >>>> is the OSGi Alliance ([email protected]) >>>> >>>>> or the OSGi Residential Expert Group. >>>>> >>>>> You are right, the OSGi UPnP specification hides a number of things >>>>> >>>> (there are pro and cons). >>>> >>>>> Few weeks ago there was a simple request about DLNA. >>>>> Please look at Felix-2370 issue ( >>>>> >>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-2730) >>>> >>>>> Which are the missing features you would like to have in a customized >>>>> >>>> UPnP implementation? >>>> >>>>> Please open or modify an issue and specify your requirements. >>>>> >>>>> Yes, the CyberlinkJava was not very active recently, but the bridge >>>>> >>>> solves only partially the problem, in any case (for DLNA) we need a >>>> review >>>> of the specification. >>>> >>>>> I don't know Cling, how much distance there is from the Cyberlink >>>>> >>>> stack >>>> to easily design an abstraction layer. >>>> >>>>> Another approach would be the modularization of all the UPnP stack, I >>>>> >>>> mean the clear separation of the SOAP, GENA, and SSDP modules. >>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Francesco >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 06/01/2011 16.15, LongkerDandy wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not sure this is the right place to talk about this. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I've been trying to write a Media Server, for a while. >>>>>> Already did some code with felix, ( >>>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/longkerdandy/chii2). >>>> >>>>> I know OSGi has a UPnP standard and Felix has implement with >>>>>> >>>>> CyberlinkJava. >>>> >>>>> But seems the project is not very active, even it shipped with a >>>>>> >>>>> Media >>>> >>>>> Server sample, it won't work. >>>>>> >>>>>> The fact is most devices/softwares are now compatible with DLNA. >>>>>> And they somehow buggy may need different headers or respond. >>>>>> >>>>>> OSGi hide all the UPnP stack, all I can get is a device interface. >>>>>> I think the idea behind that is a full UPnP stack supports all the >>>>>> >>>>> devices. >>>> >>>>> But this may not work in real world, especially the UPnP stack is not >>>>>> actively maintained. >>>>>> >>>>>> Projects like PS3 Media Sever and Serviio is build from scratch. >>>>>> Now I'm trying Cling(http://teleal.org/projects/cling), another Java >>>>>> >>>>> UPnP >>>> >>>>> stack. >>>>>> >>>>>> My thought is, >>>>>> >>>>>> DLNA is not as open as UPnP. >>>>>> OSGi may also support DLNA, and let us have a real OpenSource Java >>>>>> >>>>> DLNA >>>> >>>>> implementation. >>>>>> >>>>>> For now, can we make a bridge between UPnP driver and real UPnP >>>>>> >>>>> stack. >>>> >>>>> Thus make the UPnP stack switch-able. >>>>>> >>>>>> Regards >>>>>> LongkerDandy >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ------------------------ >>>> Kai Hackbarth · Evangelist& Chair OSGi Residential Expert Group >>>> ProSyst Software GmbH >>>> D-50858 Cologne, Germany . Dürener Strasse 405 >>>> Tel. +49 (0)221 6604 410 · Fax +49 (0)221 6604 660 >>>> Mobile +49 (0)163 6604 410 · US Mobile +1-317-6039-264 >>>> http://www.prosyst.com · [email protected] >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ------------------------ >>>> stay in touch with your product. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> ------------------------ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
