[Free] Server features to be discussed

[john grden]

On 8 Sep 2005 03:23:26 -0000, grant at bluetube.com <grant at bluetube.com> wrote:


"We could use SAML or something similar for this, user HAS to create an id, 
we verify the id via an email confirmation and then when the login we issue 
a saml assertion (a unique encrypted key, its a digital signature) this can 
be passed to the player and the player just need to supply it when they call 
and the java side verifies the key to make sure its not been tampered with 
that its valid). I do this now at work and may be able to borrow the code, 
its currently available as a library or EJB so it should be fairly easy to 
integrate."

this sounds like a great idea Grant! Now, I realize that I just understand 
what key's do and how they're used, but I'm not an expert in this are at 
all. But from what I know, the higher the encryption option, the more CPU it 
takes to deal with it at the client and server side. SO, is it 
customary/possible to give:

1. Encryption level choice?
2. Key handshake interval (either once at first connection, or with every 
transaction)?


" youre talking about failover ? If so you'd want something like jboss 
(free) and use the clustering for failover."

yes, failover. But more than clustering (which would be great if we can get 
that incorporated). I'm talking about a single server environment (Dev or 
production) where logging transactions or state changes occurs at an 
interval and if the server dies, it rebuilds the state back to the nearest 
interval (set by user). I think it's safe to say, there would be as many 
single server (if not more) environments than multiple using 
clustering/failover strategies. Do you agree with that? if so, have any 
ideas on what we might use or what the most elegant (fast/accurate) solution 
might be? 

"This is generally built into a J2EE application server but is also a 
network issue. We use a virtual ip from a CSS that load balances between 2 
webservers, they then load balance between 2 weblogic clusters (could be 
Jboss instead), you can add more servers for scaling / failover."

Ok, now maybe I missed it in what you were saying here, but what I was 
talking about was a global component that is an active agent for an 
application layer rather than server layer (clustering). So, the global 
component deals with the application and can be instanced (or not) for 
different apps running on the same server. So, if you're running a chat app 
AND a game app that both use rooms and you're in a clustered/load balanced 
situation, that global component enables you to have unique room instances 
over multiple servers dealing with the same app. Does that make sense? or 
did I compoletely miss what you were saying?

> 4. Multiple server side languages –
"To me this would be a later feature, if you want load 
balancing/clustering/failover then the J2EE app server even running just 
servlets are going to be the easiest for a first release."

You guys would know better than me about this area ;) My first thought was: 
ok, I see what you're saying here, but I wouldn't want to get married to a 
solution that we couldn't easily switch out (duh). But in saying that, I 
really want us to get SOMETHING out as a prototype that works. I maybe 
wrong, but I think there could be other areas we're going to need more 
expertise on and having something that actually works will certainly get 
people volunteering ;)

Thanks Grant - GREAT feedback

Cheers,
Grant

cheers (I love that show)
John
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/free_osflash.org/attachments/20050908/b1f0ab55/attachment-0001.htm