<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">---------- Forwarded message ---------<br>From: <strong class="gmail_sendername" dir="auto">James Browning</strong> <span dir="auto"><<a href="mailto:jamesb.fe80@gmail.com">jamesb.fe80@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 4:07 PM<br>Subject: Re: Future directions<br>To: Mark Atwood <<a href="mailto:mark.atwood@ntpsec.org">mark.atwood@ntpsec.org</a>><br></div><br><br><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 3:24 PM Mark Atwood via devel <<a href="mailto:devel@ntpsec.org" target="_blank">devel@ntpsec.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On Mon, Sep 16, 2019, at 14:09, Hal Murray via devel wrote:<br>
> I think we should put the current stuff on the back burner and make a new SHM <br>
> interface where the clients are read only.<br>
> <br>
> Is shmget/shmat the right API to use? I remember discussions of there being a <br>
> wrong API but don't remember any details.<br>
<br>
I always liked the idea of moving to a shm or a local socket "clockd" interface. <br>
<br>
(Under the hood, a UNIX domain socket or a 127/8 localhost socket is nothing more than merely a shm segment and two semiphore locks.)<br>
<br>
A clockd interface was, in fact, part of the original plan. Maybe make it the plan again?<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I vaguely (mis)remember reading something saying that was a problem.</div><div><br></div><div>My list contains.</div><div>- a multicast DNS broadcaster for NTS.</div><div>- additions to the DNS code to allow non-A/AAAA pools. (cname/srv probably)</div><div>- Additions to the DNS code to allow for mdns monitoring.</div><div>- Do something else with the Python module builder.</div><div>- less awful asccidoctor support. use waf unit test infrastructure.</div><div>- replace mode6 with a tcp service. (it was only IIRC in v2-3 RFCs)</div><div>- - or work on the auth code for ntpq a bit.</div><div>I've worked a bit on most of those.</div><div><br></div><div>Given the increase in threading would it be possible to shove smb auth into a thread?</div></div></div>
</div></div>