> From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mon Dec 17 14:46:00 2001 > Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 08:51:16 +1100 > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: LPRng: Interesting Packages, state of the art, and some comments > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Craig Small) > > On Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 10:37:25AM -0800, Patrick Powell wrote: > > At the 2nd Printing Conference, Ben Woodard outlined a proposed > > structure for a 'new printing system'. One of the components was > > a 'device interface manager'. This would provide a layer of abstraction > > for local devices, as well as support device discovery and other > > things. > > If you're looking for something to do Patrick :) there have been > murmurings about why printer daemons NEED port 515 open when a Unix > socket could do the trick as well. Obviously if the local printer > is used by remote clients it is needed and this change would mean > a non-standard extension but it shouldn't be that hard I suspect. > > - Craig > -- > Craig Small VK2XLZ GnuPG:1C1B D893 1418 2AF4 45EE 95CB C76C E5AC 12CA DFA5 > Eye-Net Consulting http://www.eye-net.com.au/ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > MIEEE <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Debian developer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Originally this was the way that it was done. You ALWAYS ran a server on your local machine, and then you would connect to a UNIX socket. The server was the one that did the network stuff. And then people decided that they wanted lightweight spooling - i.e. - no server on the localhost. I actually have code buried here (nods off to a legacy code branch) that does this. It checks to see if you are connecting to the localhost and then opens a connection to a unix socket. HOWEVER... What BENEFIT is there in doing this? First, you get all enthusiastic about security... and permissions... and then you discover that you have to run your clients SETUID root... Otherwise any program can connect to your UNIX socket... and then you get unenthusiastic again. I hate testing security. Beating the TCP/IP stuff to the ground was bad enough. The overhead difference in using TCP/IP over a UNIX domain socket in most systems is trivial. In fact, some systems FAKE sockets by using the TCP/IP network stack and effectively connecting to 127.0.0.2:port xxx where xxx maps into a node in the UNIX name space (excuse me while I whoop my cookies here...). And while you can get the 'local' benefit of 'knowing who the user is' at the local level, when you send to a remote site, you lose this... unless, of course, you use encryption. And now you need end to end encryption/authentication. Or trust tranference. And by the way, you will STILL have to have port 515 open for non-local access. But I will think about this... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- YOU MUST BE A LIST MEMBER IN ORDER TO POST TO THE LPRNG MAILING LIST The address you post from MUST be your subscription address If you need help, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] (or lprng-requests or lprng-digest-requests) with the word 'help' in the body. For the impatient, to subscribe to a list with name LIST, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with: | example: subscribe LIST <mailaddr> | subscribe lprng-digest [EMAIL PROTECTED] unsubscribe LIST <mailaddr> | unsubscribe lprng [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you have major problems, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word LPRNGLIST in the SUBJECT line. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
