ossp-pkg/srpc/EVAL
1.2
Evaluation
==========
- Name, Autor, Jahr
- URL
- Sprache
- Veschreibung, Klassifizierung
- Bewertung:
- Stand-alone?
- Self-contained?
- Portabel?
- Code ist sauber?
- API ist orthogonal?
- Verwendete Protokolle
- Warum nehmen wir's nicht.
o Spread
http://www.spread.org/
o XML-RPC:
http://www.xmlrpc.org/
http://www.focusresearch.com/gregor/sw/XPC/
http://xmlrpc-c.sourceforge.net/
o SunRPC
rfc1050.txt
rfc1057.txt
rfc1790.txt
rfc1831.txt
rfc1833.txt
rfc2203.txt
rfc2695.txt
o SRA
Secure RPC Authentication for TELNET and FTP
net.tamu.edu:pub/security/TAMU/
o RPC2
ftp://ftp.coda.cs.cmu.edu/pub/rpc2/
o MRPC
http://www.tildeslash.org/mrpc.html
http://www.tildeslash.org/mrpc/
o LinuxDoors
http://www.rampant.org/doors/
o DCERPC
ftp://gatekeeper.dec.com/pub/DEC/DCE/
RSE:
----
ORBit ...... nice ORBit 2.2 implementation in C, but undocumented
FreeBSD .... the most clean RPC, but only RPCv1
SunRPC40 ... too old, FreeBSD's code is much more feature-full and portable, RPCv1
NetBSD ..... very similar to FreeBSD code with a few addons "long long", but less clean, RPCv1
tirpc ...... Transport Layer Independent RPC, but unportable and old
RPC2 ....... nice concept, but neither RPCv1 nor RPC2 and requires LWP library
and is also bundled strongly with it
MRPC ....... modular architecture (tranport layer interchangeable), but
depends on re2c and is implemented in cpp, neither RPCv1 nor RPCv2
XMLRPC ..... taugt nicht, nur nettes Konzept, keine C Implementierung,
starker Overhead, etc.
