Slashdot Mirror
Are There Alternatives to UPnP?
semanticgap asks: "I am thinking of putting together a PC based home entertainment system (media server in the basement talking to various computers around the house and controllable via some sort of a remote control device, etc.) as a fun project with emphasis on writing software. I've been reading up on the current state of affairs, and it looks like the protocol for this sort of a thing is UPnP (Universal Plug-n-Pray). It seems to provide all the functionality I want, but I don't like the fact that it is developed by Microsoft, nor do I like it in general - it relies heavily on things like UUID's, HTTPMU and other Microsoft-ish hacks. So I thought I'd ask Slashdot community - is UPnP going to gain acceptance, or are there alternatives to it?"
It can hardly be universal if it is proprietary to Microsoft. Instead, it will be Microsoft-centric and doubtful that other operating systems would use it.
Ouch! The truth hurts!
Sure, just watch the WB-P instead. No one is forcing you to watch T'Pol on Enterprise, you know!
Its called Macintosh.
I'm not trolling or flaming. But you can get a mac and use it as your digital hub and things just work. Plus with firewire becoming the future standard for in home video and audio delivery, you'll have first in class Firewire support with a mac.
And you'll get all this for less than you'd pay for a comparable pc.
(Oh, now I hear the flamers coming "I got an athlon CPU for $200, a top of the line powermac costs $6,000! when I get my CPU in a computer I will have a faster computer and have saved %3000!" Except that it isn't and you wouldn't have. Get a comparable PC from IBM or Toshiba and you pay more.)
Seriously, for AV the digital hub idea on macs work, the software is well supported, and they even look decent amongst your stereo equipment.
Hell, they invented plug and play and they are the best implementation of it so far.
Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23
http://developer.apple.com/macosx/rendezvous/j ini/
http://developer.java.sun.com/developer/products/
The fact the uPnP is being thrust upon the world by Microsoft guarantees that it will be a winning "standard" (gag). Already it is widely deployed on Win2k and XP and as these system's market penetration continues, after a while everyone will have it.
You, however, asked if there are alternatives. Of course there are. None will likely have the market penetration that uPnP will have but a possibly strong contender will be Apple's Rendevzous, recently announced here on Slashdot. It uses Apple's "Open Source" license.
Linux | ICANN | Online Trading | Video-on-demand | Server Blades | Spam | 802.11 | Instant Messaging | Internet Protocol | Pay-for-Placement Search | HP/Compaq | Hacking | AOL vs MSN | 9/11
Developer
September 26, 2002
Critical Flaws Affront Microsoft's FrontPage
By Michael Chait
Microsoft (Quote, Company Info, News) is warning system administrators Thursday morning that a new vulnerability is lurking in a FrontPage extention tool known as a SmartHTML interpreter that could be exploited to allow an attacker to cause a denial-of-service (define) attack or run the code of their choice their servers.
Microsoft has said that FrontPage Server Extensions (FPSE) 2000 and 2002 are both vulnerable, although the flaw affects each version differently.
With FPSE 2000, the flaw, discovered by Maninder Bharadwaj of the Digital Defense Services division of Digital GlobalSoft, could cause most CPU availability to be consumed until the Web service is restarted. An attacker could use this vulnerability to conduct a denial of service attack against an affected Web server. With FPSE 2002, the same flaw in the interpreter causes a buffer overrun, potentially allowing an attacker to run code of the his choice.
Because Microsoft has the policy of no longer supporting older versions, it stated that versions released prior to 2000 may or may not be affected by these vulnerabilities.
FPSE is a set of tools that can be installed on a FrontPage-based Web site, which serves to allow authorized personnel to manage the server, as well as to add functions that are frequently used by Web pages, such as search and forms support.
The vulnerability lies in the SmartHTML interpreter, which supports certain types of dynamic Web content.
A security bulletin issued by Microsoft explains the flaw, stating: "If a request for a certain type of web file is made in a particular way, it could have the effect on a web server using FrontPage Server Extensions 2000 of causing the SmartHTML interpreter to cycle endlessly, consuming all of the server's CPU availability and preventing the server from performing useful work. On a web server using FrontPage Server Extensions 2002, this same type of request could have the effect of causing a buffer overrun and potentially allowing an attacker to run malicious code on that server."
Microsoft has designated the vulnerability as critical on both versions of FPSE. Since FPSE installs by default as part of IIS 4.0, 5.0 and 5.1, the company says the easiest way to mend the problem is to apply a patch. Microsoft released a patch this morning, which is available here for FPSE 2002 on all platforms, here for FPSE 2000 on NT4, and at Windows update for systems running FPSE on Windows XP or 2000.
The issuance of warnings and patches is becoming a weekly ritual for the Redmond-based software giant. Despite a $100 million effort to improve security and the installation of a new security czar, Microsoft has already this year announced over 70 vulnerabilities in 53 separate advisories.
To date, the company has released even more vulnerabilities than it had at this time in 2001, and looks to be on track to outpace last year's overall number of vulnerabilities.
Microsoft could not be reached for comment this morning.
Developer Archives
recent headlines
Developer News
Critical Flaws Affront Microsoft's FrontPage
Opera 6.0 for Mac OS X Released
Apple Opens Rendezvous Code
Fifth Release of Apache 2.0 Available for Download
Sun Drives Java Beyond Handsets
More News...
Top Stories
Critical Flaws Affront Microsoft's FrontPage
EarthLink Looks to Enterprise Market
PalmSource in Good Competition with RIM
Court Approves Metrocall Reorganization Plan
MSN 8 Does Home Networking
More News...
Copyright 2002 Jupitermedia Corporation All Rights Reserved.
Legal Notices, Licensing, Reprints, & Permissions, Privacy Policy.
http://www.internet.com/
The Center of Nanoelectronics Business
There are no alternatives, you dumbass. It's universal plug and play.
Universal Plug in play is not about hardware, it's about network configuration.
Linksys uses it is allow NetMeeting sessions throught it NAT Router. Without UPiP Net Meting will not make it's way past the NAT router.
Expect to see more MS apps work in this manner.
The Linux UPnP Internet Gateway Device Project
Also note that MS isn't the only folks supplying UPnP, Intel also developed a lot which is now Open Sourced.
Rendevous & Zeroconf information:
-
IETF Zero Configuration Networking (Zeroconf) Group
-
IETF Zeroconf on Apple Rendezvous and Zeroconf
-
Apple's Customer-pitch for Rendezvous
-
Apple's Developer-pitch for Rendezvous
Here's an earlier Apple implementation called SLP (RFC 2608) also used by Novell:Finally, for completeness here is UPnP:
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Jini is a java based service delivery system that is a great alternative to UPnP. I'm currently working on a network based music player so I can play mp3's on my home stereo and control it from anywhere with a web browser.
First, let me address UPnP and Microsoft. Yes, UPnP was originally conceived by MS, and MS has written themselves onto the steering committee forever. However, the UPnP membership agreement precludes any member from owning the technology outright, and says that anyone who offers technology to the forum must do so without encumberance. Even Microsoft. UPnP is NOT proprietary to MS.
Second, the technology. Everything in UPnP can be had for free. We've developed (and are successfully selling) two UPnP protocol stacks, one in ANSI C and one in Java. This was all home-grown, and we didn't need to license anything from anyone except the UPnP forum.
As mentioned before to use the technology, you need to be a UPnP Forum member. Membership is free, and the only real restriction is that anything you suggest for inclusion be done so without encumberance. Anyone can join. If you join, and don't want to donate technology, then don't bring it up. It's as easy as that.
The underlying standards are either pre-existing standards or build by the UPnP Forum. A case in point is Auto-IP, which does the ad-hoc network configuration. It's based on an IETF draft (draft-ietf-ipv4-autoconfig-05), which was originally authored by someone at Apple. I wouldn't be too surprised if it's very similar to Auto-IP. It's too bad that Apple didn't get involved earlier, we'd only have one uniform way to do this, instead of two Again, this isn't a MS invention.
There are a lot of UPnP implementations available. Intel did indeed provide a GPL protocol stack that you can download from their site. It builds on Linux nicely, and give you sample apps, etc. We have our two stacks that will begin appearing in cheap applicances Real Soon Now (tm) thanks to our silicon-builder-friends.
Alternatives to UPnP? Not really, at least not in one place. Many folks who responded to this message address only the Auto-IP part, where the box gets its IP address (FYI, Auto-IP on a net with DHCP is pretty much just DHCP). What they're missing is the juice of UPnP, where there's a protocol for device discovery and control. All the control and discovery is without any a-priori knowlege or configuration! (N.b., UPnP and Plug&Play are entirely different beasts: UPnP is on a network, Plug&Play and Kudzu are a single box)
E.g., your UPnP PVR is on a net with your UPnP phone (they're both coming). They know about each other, thanks to UPnP. Phone rings, PVR pauses automatically and puts up caller ID. You pick up the phone, talk, hang up, PVR starts again. Your washing machine tells you it's time to switch the load over, not only on the TV, but on your UPnP Zaurus or iPaq (reality today), or perhaps your electronic picture frame. You want to listen to your MP3 library from your home server. Easy. Your iPaq, Zaurus, stereo receiver, anything, knows in advance how to search for media sources, get a list of titles available, and start spooling it down. Click and go.
Our demos are much, much cooler than that even, but I don't know how much I can say.
To answer your question, sure there are alternatives, but they're in many disjoint parts. I'd suggest getting Intel's kit, and playing with it, seeing what you can do with it. Whether you do that, or play with disjoint parts, you'll be experimenting, but UPnP will take off fairly soon now.
NIT - Not Invented There
From your recommendation it appears you have no clue what Universal Plug and Play even is.
(= XP 2000+.
WTF!!!!!!
What the hell is Linux 8.0
Linux "numbering schemes" are a pile of marketing crap, made up by the distribution peoplel.
And if you bought a Banshee new then you are even more or a git than your "Linux 8.0" comment makes you out to be - I got one of those new about 3 years ago.
Why dont you go and learn what you are talking about before posting.
Linux isn't about version numbers, if anything the distributions should be numbered after the Kernel.
Besides running Debian as I do, I dont run ANY kind of version, I have the apps I need, the kernal I need and it works - who cares if its Linux XP or whatever.
It sounds like you want a protocol that will allow you to communicate/control each device. I have written an RFP draft for a Universal Packet Driver Protocol (UPDP) based on ICMP extensions. It's basically a protocol to allow devices to announce themselves, describe how they can be controlled, and provides for authentication. Tell me if it is something your interested in working with.
"[Regarding UPNP]It seems to provide all the functionality I want, but I don't like the fact that it is developed by Microsoft"
See, this is what defines a dumbass. The functionality is provided, the technology is here, you admit that this is what you need, but then you disparage it just because it was developed by microsoft. Swallow your perceived pride and just use the damn stuff instead of looking for a less-functional alternative.
I think, therefore I am an Atheist.
The IEEE Computer Society Magazine published in August an article on this topic. There are a lot of alternatives to UPnP: Sun, Hewlett-Packard, Apple, etc.
Unfortunately, I don't have the magazine here, so I cannot say much. Here is the index of the magazine, here abstract of the article, and here is the article in PDF (but you must pay 19$ US for it).
If you are actually interested, e-mail me (pgq AT poboxes DOT com) and I'll send you a summary.