Hi All.<br>
<br>
I think the entire ser community would agree that this is not really
the best way to manage external connectivity to ser. It's just a
maintenance nightmare - so an abstraction layer is desperately needed. <br>
<br>
I'm also have the opinion that the FIFO needs to be phased out and completely replaced with a real network server.<br>
<br>
Just my $0.02 worth.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Paul<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 4/15/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Juha Heinanen</b> &lt;<a href="mailto:jh@tutpro.com">jh@tutpro.com</a>&gt; wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Marian Dumitru writes:<br><br> &gt; similar to FIFO interface, there is a UNIX socket one. Also I saw posted<br> &gt; recently a patch for UDP/TCP sockets, but haven't tried yet.<br><br>i tried it and it worked ok for some functions and not for some others.
<br>also, it currently doesn't support an allowed clients file or database<br>table.<br><br>there is something wrong in the design of external access to ser.<br>an abstraction layer is missing between modules and external access
<br>methods.&nbsp;&nbsp;so each module has to currently support fifo, unix<br>socket, and also tcp/udp interface.<br><br>-- juha<br><br>_______________________________________________<br>Serusers mailing list<br><a href="mailto:serusers@lists.iptel.org">
serusers@lists.iptel.org</a><br><a href="http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers">http://lists.iptel.org/mailman/listinfo/serusers</a><br></blockquote></div><br>