[Kde-hardware-devel] Solid UPnP GSoC idea

[Friedrich W. H. Kossebau]

Jeudi, le 8 avril 2010, à 23:57, Kevin Ottens a écrit:
> On Wednesday 7 April 2010 15:01:51 Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> > A module wrapping access to the InternetGatewayDevice type would indeed
> > be useful. E.g. currently KTorrent and Konversation both have their own
> > custom stand-alone code (though derived from each other) to punch a hole
> > into the gateway (for NAT traversal), and Kopete lacks even that.
> 
> Not sure what you have in mind here with "module". But the way I see it,
> the only thing required would be a Solid::NetworkGateway class (inheriting
> from DeviceInterface) which would provide two methods (one to open a port,
> one to close it). This way once you get a hold on a device which is IGD
> you could just:
> Solid::Device d = ...;
> d.as<Solid::NetworkGateway>()->openPort(...);
> ...
> d.as<Solid::NetworkGateway>()->closePort(...);
> 
> Sounds fairly easy to use from any application out there.

Just that this enlarges the Solid lib for every program using Solid, most 
anything but interested in punching gateway holes.
 
Shouldn't this be rather part of some SolidControl lib? Or being solved by 
some dl'opened plugin for each device implementation?

> > > - Network neighborhood plasma widget.
> > 
> > I would like that. And other like Kevin I also think it should be a
> > different one to the one for the locally connected. I even would prefer
> > it it would show the devices similarly to how the windows are shown in
> > the tasks(/windows) applet, just with icon-only mode. Kind of what the
> > network:/ kio-slave shows, just as convenient applet, with added value.
> 
> In fact, wouldn't it be a specialized view on network:/ results? Sounds
> very much like it to me.

No, it would be more, as one wouldn't have to pipe (a subset of) the available 
information and interaction through KIO.

> > > The UPnP backend for Solid will test the architecture in preparation
> > > for other local network protocols: DAAP, Bonjour, netbios, ...
> > 
> > For this it might also be interesting to see how
> > http://websvn.kde.org/trunk/KDE/kdebase/runtime/kioslave/network/network/
> > could be enhanced as an alternative. The remote (and more
> > service-oriented) nature of stuff on the network might not really fit
> > into the scope of Solid perhaps.
> > Unless we expect Solid to e.g. deliver all http servers on the network.
> > Would we?
> 
> I'd say no. That'd definitely be opening the pandora box. :-)
> 
> I think we should limit ourselves to multimedia devices/network storage
> (just like we used to report media players... but now they're connected
> via ethernet/wifi and not simply USB) and to those very focused headless
> devices (network gateway, possibly home automation devices).
> 
> "http server" lacks some focus I'd say. We shouldn't simply report anything
> which has a port open to the outside. ;-)

Why not? After all it's a property/ability of that device/hardware. Where else 
should it be reported? And how would you think the overlap should be handled, 
if it was reported elsewhere?

Cheers
Friedrich
-- 
KDE Okteta - a simple hex editor - http://utils.kde.org/projects/okteta