pydonkey-general
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Pydonkey-general] Re: Todo for pysocket


From: Joël Vennin
Subject: [Pydonkey-general] Re: Todo for pysocket
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2003 15:28:55 +0200
User-agent: KMail/1.5.3

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Le Samedi 30 Août 2003 14:27, vous avez écrit :
> As demanded, ToDo-List for pysocket:
>
> 1.) UDP support
>     Problem:
>        - does not fit the structure of pysocket by now, because you have
> always to make sendto(data, address) and recvfrom(data, address)
>     Solution:
>        - Establishing Pseudo-Static-Connection
>        Problem:
>           - You never know when a session ends, because often packets
> are only sent once
>
> 2.) SSL-Support
>
> 3.) Protection System:
>     - proove against DDOS attacks and garbled packages etc.
>        Solutions:
>           - Credit Point system like lugdunum (vulnerable as it seems)
>             See:
> http://www.emule-project.net/board/index.php?showtopic=24033
>     - Problems: How deep can we interact with the socket API in Python?
>
> 4.) Connections ensurance:
>       At the moment we connect to a client like this:
>
>     def connecty(self,address):
>         self.connected = 0
>         err = self.socket.connect_ex(address)
>
>         if err in (EINPROGRESS, EALREADY, EWOULDBLOCK):
>             return
>         if err in (0, EISCONN):
>             self.addr = address
>             self.connected = 1
>             self.handle_connect()
>         else:
>             raise socket.error, err
>
>     So we take a connection for established even when it not is already.
> The source is taken from the asynchat.
>     I don't if it's going to be a problem, because the connection will
> be lost immediately when it fails, but could result in strange results,
> and even in DDOS-Attacks
>     from our side.
>
> 5.) Better bandwidth control
>     - the bandwidth control seems to be a little bit inconsistent
>        - Solution: integrating it directly into the poll-functions
>     - adding second bandwidth control with for example n GB / month
I think this it not useful for now


>     - Bug: It is not possible to set up  a connection without bandwidth
> control
Sure

> 6.) Priorising Connections
>     - there should be a possibility for laying priority on some connections
>        Solution: in the poll function priorised connections are always
> checked first or n-th with prio n, so we sort them before ask them
>        Problem: in a worse case low-prio connection will never be able
> to send anything

> 7.) Integrating user-defined data must be made easier, when it is needed
> in the protocol
>        Solution: Option to add a data-container to the protocol
Explain more ...

> That's it for the moment, tell your ideas,
I think you have resume all the stuff before a first release :p
> Spikeee

Jol
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/UKaaOzJ7itUoJpQRAh07AJ9xHWBHzTXadSDdpDdjrN4iVpf3ygCeJSqS
NB4LfIr1cm0UE8UQcMRSbV0=
=vorM
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----





reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]