Hi,
Does the getting of metadata is supported now in the bluez .
--
Thanks& Regards,
Sathish N
Am Mittwoch, 30. November 2011, 07:45:49 schrieb Brian Gix:
> If you are an FTP server, you are giving authorized remote users blanket
> authority to read, write or browse, or some combination, your exposed
> FTP file system.
You could add OBEX authentication support for access control.
HS
Hi Jaganath,
On 11/29/2011 10:34 PM, Jaganath wrote:
> From: "Luiz Augusto von Dentz" <[email protected]>
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Johan Hedberg
>> <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011, Jaganath wrote:
>>>> Currently in OBEXD, only OPP put has authorization and file progress
>>>> indication. I am planning to implement the same in FTP
>>>> put/get/delete the
>>>> same way as it does in OPP. But application may need to know the
>>>> type of the
>>>> obex operation to which the Authorize method is invoked. So I am
>>>> planning to
>>>> add a new method namely GetProperties in transfer, which returns the
>>>> type of
>>>> the operation (put/get/delete) so that application can use it in
>>>> Authorize
>>>> method. Please let me know your suggestions.
>>>
>>> We try to avoid such extra round-trips in our D-Bus APIs. If such a
>>> feature is really needed the essential context information should be
>>> provided as parameters to the "authorize" call.
>>
>> Im not so sure authorize here is really useful since FTP requires
>> connection authorization anyway, we can create transfers if the
>> purpose is to log them.
>
> Thanks for your reply.
> Even if FTP has connection authorization I think it is better to ask
> file authorization for put/get/delete. This gives more flexibility to
> application. It is up to application to decide whether to ask end user
> or simply accept. Also in put case if a file with same filename is already
> there, then this approach will be useful for application to handle that.
I think you may be confusing use cases.
If you are an FTP server, you are giving authorized remote users blanket
authority to read, write or browse, or some combination, your exposed
FTP file system. I suppose you could require additional
operation-by-operation request/confirm, but that would quickly make the
system very clumsy. It's not the usage model that FTP was designed for.
That is why we have the OPP profile, which is specifically for single
object sharing, and that has that kind of request/confirm model.
--
Brian Gix
[email protected]
Employee of Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc.
Qualcomm Innovation Center, Inc. is a member of Code Aurora Forum
Hi Johan and Luiz
--------------------------------------------------
From: "Luiz Augusto von Dentz" <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 7:46 PM
To: "Jaganath" <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: FTP file authorization and transfer progress support
> Hi Jaganath,
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Johan Hedberg <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Hi Jaganath,
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011, Jaganath wrote:
>>> Currently in OBEXD, only OPP put has authorization and file progress
>>> indication. I am planning to implement the same in FTP put/get/delete
>>> the
>>> same way as it does in OPP. But application may need to know the type of
>>> the
>>> obex operation to which the Authorize method is invoked. So I am
>>> planning to
>>> add a new method namely GetProperties in transfer, which returns the
>>> type of
>>> the operation (put/get/delete) so that application can use it in
>>> Authorize
>>> method. Please let me know your suggestions.
>>
>> We try to avoid such extra round-trips in our D-Bus APIs. If such a
>> feature is really needed the essential context information should be
>> provided as parameters to the "authorize" call.
>
> Im not so sure authorize here is really useful since FTP requires
> connection authorization anyway, we can create transfers if the
> purpose is to log them.
Thanks for your reply.
Even if FTP has connection authorization I think it is better to ask
file authorization for put/get/delete. This gives more flexibility to
application. It is up to application to decide whether to ask end user
or simply accept. Also in put case if a file with same filename is already
there, then this approach will be useful for application to handle that.
Hi Jaganath,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 3:53 PM, Johan Hedberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Jaganath,
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011, Jaganath wrote:
>> Currently in OBEXD, only OPP put has authorization and file progress
>> indication. I am planning to implement the same in FTP put/get/delete the
>> same way as it does in OPP. But application may need to know the type of the
>> obex operation to which the Authorize method is invoked. So I am planning to
>> add a new method namely GetProperties in transfer, which returns the type of
>> the operation (put/get/delete) so that application can use it in Authorize
>> method. Please let me know your suggestions.
>
> We try to avoid such extra round-trips in our D-Bus APIs. If such a
> feature is really needed the essential context information should be
> provided as parameters to the "authorize" call.
Im not so sure authorize here is really useful since FTP requires
connection authorization anyway, we can create transfers if the
purpose is to log them.
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
Hi Jaganath,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011, Jaganath wrote:
> Currently in OBEXD, only OPP put has authorization and file progress
> indication. I am planning to implement the same in FTP put/get/delete the
> same way as it does in OPP. But application may need to know the type of the
> obex operation to which the Authorize method is invoked. So I am planning to
> add a new method namely GetProperties in transfer, which returns the type of
> the operation (put/get/delete) so that application can use it in Authorize
> method. Please let me know your suggestions.
We try to avoid such extra round-trips in our D-Bus APIs. If such a
feature is really needed the essential context information should be
provided as parameters to the "authorize" call.
Johan
Hi,
Currently in OBEXD, only OPP put has authorization and file progress
indication. I am planning to implement the same in FTP put/get/delete the
same way as it does in OPP. But application may need to know the type of the
obex operation to which the Authorize method is invoked. So I am planning to
add a new method namely GetProperties in transfer, which returns the type of
the operation (put/get/delete) so that application can use it in Authorize
method. Please let me know your suggestions.
Thanks and Regards
Jaganath
On Tuesday 29 November 2011 05:30 PM, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> Hi Sathish,
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:39 PM, sathish<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi Luiz,
>> The bluez that is in git repository has the dbus api saying something
>> about metadata information , will that dbus api will be useful
> I suppose you are talking about org.bluez.MediaPlayer? This interface
> is implemented by other processes (players) to expose their metadata,
> IMO it is not really suitable for the opposite role. I would suggest
> having another interface specific for this role (e.g. org.bluez.Target
> or org.bluez.Player) which gonna be registered in the device object
> path, it should be pretty similar to MediaPlayer interface except for
> Release. It also a good idea to think about how we gonna address
> multiple players since that is supported in AVRCP 1.4.
>
Hi Luiz,
Thanks for the kind reply. Will these interface gives metadata
information about all players or players that support mpris.
--
Thanks& Regards,
Sathish N
Hi Sathish,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:39 PM, sathish <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Luiz,
> ? ?The bluez that is in git repository has the dbus api saying something
> about metadata information , will that dbus api will be useful
I suppose you are talking about org.bluez.MediaPlayer? This interface
is implemented by other processes (players) to expose their metadata,
IMO it is not really suitable for the opposite role. I would suggest
having another interface specific for this role (e.g. org.bluez.Target
or org.bluez.Player) which gonna be registered in the device object
path, it should be pretty similar to MediaPlayer interface except for
Release. It also a good idea to think about how we gonna address
multiple players since that is supported in AVRCP 1.4.
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz
On Tuesday 29 November 2011 04:56 PM, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote:
> Hi Sathish,
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:27 AM, sathish<[email protected]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Does the getting of metadata is supported now in the bluez .
>>
>> --
>> Thanks& Regards,
>> Sathish N
> Currently not, but it should not be too much effort to get it done
> since we have already implemented the protocol layer.
>
Hi Luiz,
The bluez that is in git repository has the dbus api saying
something about metadata information , will that dbus api will be useful
--
Thanks& Regards,
Sathish N
--
Thanks& Regards,
Sathish N
Hi Sathish,
On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 11:27 AM, sathish <[email protected]> wrote:
> ?Hi,
> Does the getting of metadata is supported now in the bluez .
>
> --
> Thanks& ?Regards,
> Sathish N
Currently not, but it should not be too much effort to get it done
since we have already implemented the protocol layer.
--
Luiz Augusto von Dentz