Right now when the needs of a vdr extension goes beyond core SVDRP capabilities a different approach is being used by the each extensions.
Prominent examples are:
- vdradmin (using native SVDRP and suffering from its performance, optional use of direct file access to epg data)
- live-plugin (integrating into vdr as plugin)
- vdr iphone remote (using native SVDRP and due the bad performance and encryption capabilities an optional web-based interface)
(and I'm sure there are more)

While this is not bad per se there is obviously room for improvement. So my idea was to introduce a new standardized interface to VDR (either as plugin or native SVDRP commands) to plugins/extensions offering:
- encryption (to be able to use it remotely in a more secure fashion)
- compression (to overcome performance limitations especially when large amount of epg data have to be transferred)
- and optionally authentication for obvious reasons

Now I would like to start a few discussions related to this topic, the ones that come to my mind mind first are:
- Should this be implemented as plugin or in core vdr as svdrp extension?
- Would Klaus accept patches if this will be native SVDRP?
- Are developers/maintainers of current or feature plugins/extensions interested in such a solution?
- What technical implementation would make most sense?
- Who would be willing to contribute to such a project?

For the first step I was thinking about adding a "STARTTLS" command to core vdr (as patch) handling encryption and maybe also tranparent compression. This taks should be fairly easy as we could borrow ideas or even code from existing projects using STARTTLS (like mail servers).
Authentication however would require a major redesign as far as I can tell.

German version of this discussion can be found here:

Thanks for your feedback,

vdr mailing list

Reply via email to