RFC trying to support non RPC Pipe service(s)

[Volker Lendecke]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 06:47:38PM +0100, Noel Power wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I have been looking into MS-WSP which communicates over SMB with named
> pipes. However, unlike other named-pipe services it doesn't use RPC. The
> patchset attached is a WIP implementation of some infrastructure heavily
> based/influenced by the RPC framework to help provide services that use
> pipes in that manner and/or create clients that want to communicate with
> such services.
> In my own mind I have been calling this mode of operation 'raw' pipe (as
> opposed to RPC) and I use that term heavily in naming of functions,
> files etc.  However, it strikes me that probably the term might mean
> something completely different in the SMB world (which I know little
> about), if so it would be good to get input for a different term or name
> to use if appropriate.
> One of my main worries is that I have missed something completely
> obvious and that my little bit of work here is completely unnecessary so
> it would be good to know if that is the case, e.g. is this nuts?, should
> I have done/used something else?
> Some other random notes:
>   * Currently although the code here should (afaict) be independent of
> the RPC implementation it is based on, it lives in the same directory
> structure, I can change that of course but I would like to get some more
> direction before make possibly useless changes

Why do you make the raw pipe support depend on the RPC
infrastructure? I'd rather say the RPC infrastructure should
depend on raw pipes. That's the basic question I have when
looking at the code. Please be patient with me, I haven't
looked at that code for quite a while.

Thanks,

Volker

-- 
SerNet GmbH, Bahnhofsallee 1b, 37081 Göttingen
phone: +49-551-370000-0, fax: +49-551-370000-9
AG Göttingen, HRB 2816, GF: Dr. Johannes Loxen
http://www.sernet.de, mailto:kontakt at sernet.de