[news.eclipse.technology.ecf] Re: supported transport mediums

[Scott Lewis <slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Patrik,

If you are willing and able to do some work on implementing a provider 
based upon one/several of the protocols you mentioned then I would like 
to suggest that you work directly with me and the other ECF team members 
to do so...so that we can learn what additional support ECF should 
provide to protocol implementers to make the tasks easier.

And if your work can be contributed back to ECF/foundation, then that 
would be terrific, but even if not, it would be very helpful to improve 
the API moving forward based upon your/other's experiences in creating 
provider implementations.  We want to make such efforts as easy as possible.

So please let us know if you are going to go down this road, and we'll 
coordinate/assist directly in the effort (e.g. with specific docs, 
answers to questions, additional supporting code in ECF, etc).

Thanks,

Scott



Patrik wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> Thanks for the reply...
>
> If I manage to get something running within ECF I will be happy to
> contribute.
>
> Br
> Patrik
>
> "Scott Lewis" <slewis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:42312A65.2000906@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> > Hi Patrik,
> >
> > Thanks for the nice words.
> >
> > There is nothing about the basic ECF container abstraction that
> > requires/demands TCP-based communication.  Since we've just started,
> > we've only implemented 2 providers of this abstraction so far...i.e. 1)
> > a basic tcp-based group communications and 2) a xmpp/jabber-based
> > provider...also based upon tcp).
> >
> > It would be very nice to have additional ECF providers...implemented
> > upon completely different network transports...i.e. the ones you
> > mention.  We would welcome with open arms any suggestions and/or
> > implementation contributions you and/or others might be willing to make!
> >  We would like to work with people to implement the ECF container
> > abstraction around EPL-compatible implementations of other
> > communications transports...and make these available as ECF provider
> > plugins that application writers could use.
> >
> > The ECF container abstraction does imply *some* notion of minimal
> > reliability/failure detection in communications, but it does not have to
> > necessarily be based upon TCP.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Scott
> >
> >
> >
> > Patrik wrote:
> >
> > > Hi guys,
> > >
> > > First, thanks for an impressive demo @ EclipseCon2005, the ECF is really
> > > nice.
> > >
> > > I've started to look at ECF and what it can do, but I'm missing one
>
> piece
>
> > > here...
> > >
> > > It seems that the current impl. only addresses communication over
>
> sockets
>
> > > typically using TCP. Is there any plans to extend the framwork to
>
> support
>
> > > solutions using e.g. UART and USB or is that already possible?
> > >
> > > Br
> > > Patrik Schalin