On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 05:44:26PM -0500, Wez Furlong wrote: > I've been distant from DCE for a little while, so I don't have all the > details at the tip of my brain. > > Luke isn't quite correct, but is mostly correct :-) burblburble never truer...
> FreeDCE doesn't contain a working DCOM implementation. ah - i wasn't aware of that. > The following > areas need(ed) some work for that: > > 1/ NTLMSSP (which we now have in freedce, thanks to Luke) and GSS-API thanks to luke howard [although it's not needed for DCOM] > 2/ The rpcd/endpoint mapper needs awareness of ORPC and implement one or > two ORPC specific services in order to maintain the lifetime of remotely > activated components. which jelmer of the samba team is aware of because he has _also_ started implementing DCOM. > 3/ The IDL compiler and marshalling stubs need awareness of ORPC > 4/ On top of that, the local COM library needs to be implemented > Filling out these areas is *massively less work* than re-implementing > DCE-RPC; I made a fair start on (2) and (3) 4 years ago, but lack of > interest from the world at large (and a need to pay my bills) caused it > to be put on hold. thank you for filling in the areas in which my knowledge was hazy about what was involved. > Please believe me when I say that there is a large amount of non-trivial > code in there; I have huge respect for the people that wrote it and the > amount of time that it took to get it there. Don't forget that this is > production quality code that has been used by huge players for years. ibm, dec, fujitsu, entegrity, arthur anderson, HP - about the only people who _haven't_ really used it are sun microsystems because they are known to always chase after money, taking people off projects and putting them on others - so nobody in their right mind would consider awarding them a $500m contract. > I > pity anyone that would think of taking on the task of re-implementing > it, not because it's nasty but because it's a *huge* effort. > > While I can't commit development time right at this moment (I'm booked > up with the PHP project in most of my "free" time), I am happy to help > in any other way that I can; I researched the implementation of DCOM > quite heavily back then, so I probably have a better idea than most > about getting it done. > > --Wez. > > PS: I'd *love* to have someone sponsor my employer (omniti.com) to have > me work on getting this implemented. > > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: > >>I already checked out FreeDCE and the newly released DCE-RPC several days > >>ago. Neither provides a DCOM implementation, neither resembles what we > >>need. We may be able to take some code or ideas from them with some work > >>to massage it, but there's not much of use there. > > > > > >dear mike, > > > >you are correct about DCE 1.2.2 not containing DCOM: it is > >FreeDCE that does. > > > >other than that - with all due respect, and if i understand > >you correctly: you are wrong [or looking in the wrong place] > > > >e see this: > > > > > > http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/freedce/freedce/dcom/dcom.h?rev=1.1&view=markup > > > >which has been available for just over four years, now. > > > > > >are you _seriously_ intending to reimplement the DCE/RPC IDL > >compiler - because that's what's required!!! > > > >DCOM is DCE/RPC underneath: DCOM even has the uuids and > >transports of DCE/RPC. DCOM is just a c++ wrapper on top of > >some underlying c APIs, and from what i can gather, you "up" > >the revision numbers of the interfaces, which DCE/RPC can even > >do for you. > > > >perhaps i should put you in touch with wez furlong who did > >the original FreeDCE DCOM work. > > > >you _cannot_ be serious about reinventing the 250,000 lines > >of c code required to properly support DCE/RPC which is a > >prerequisite for supporting DCOM. > > > >i can understand the samba team doing that, but _another_ > >project doing it??? > > > >please tell me i am wrong in believing that you are giving > >serious consideration to a _third_ DCE/RPC runtime and > >development environment, to compete with samba 4's GPL'd > >implementation which is in development and with FreeDCE's > >complete reference implementation which is available under an > >OSF 1.0 BSD-like license. > > > >l. > > > -- -- <a href="http://lkcl.net";>http://lkcl.net</a> --
