Luca,
Please find my comments inline your proposal, also I updated the API requirements accordingly:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wnVY50O9ufSCX6E4f7s58U9_xyRMS80e5-9OnaVA30U/edit
Regards,
Harold.
-----Original Message-----
From:
dpi-api-standa...@googlegroups.com [mailto:
dpi-api-standa...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Luca Deri
Sent: jeudi 11 décembre 2014 08:56
To:
dpi-api-standa...@googlegroups.com
Subject: My view
Hi all,
sorry for the delay but the year end is always a rush. I think that in order to stick with the original goal we need to define an API. The initial proposal is good but it is mostly incomplete as 1. it has too many void* that makes is complicated to use as it leaves open too many options
[Harold LABRUYERE] It is important to work as much as possible with handles (or void *) and provide data accessor in order to ensure ABI compatibility easy to maintain. It is important to avoid specific structures as much as possible
2. it does not define a way to map “local protocols” to a static one. Example, if nDPI identified HTTP as protocol X and QoSMos as protocolId Y, the API must return for HTTP a single and uniform identifier. This because the app using the API should not be aware of any difference
[Harold LABRUYERE] I added this requirement in the configuration API.
3. I am open to define protocols in layers, so you can have TCP/HTTP/Facebook for instance
[Harold LABRUYERE] I think here, I would propose on one end a protocol part up to L7 : IP/TCP/HTTP then we have different type of potential informations
1) Application or Service : Facebook, Facebook Application. 0-n occurrences per flow
2) Client application : Vuze, Chrome, Botnet. 0-n occurrences per flow
3) Workflow information : "File Download", "Facebook Login". 0-n occurrences per flow
4) Category : "Networking", "P2P", "Video" : 0-n occurrences per flow
5) Content Delivery Network : "Akamai", "Google", "Microsoft"...
This said we need to move forward with the API. I don’t think google groups is good for that. If you have a github account or so, I can start pushing changes to the initial API
Regards Luca
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Deep Packet Inspection API Standardization Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to
dpi-api-standardizat...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to
dpi-api-standa...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/dpi-api-standardization-group.
To view this discussion on the web visit
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dpi-api-standardization-group/6DF678BE-8F94-4C72-B0E5-B30624628D2D%40ntop.org.
For more options, visit
https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
This message and any attachments (the "message") are confidential, intended solely for the addressees. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by e-mail and delete this message from your system. In this case, you are not authorized to use, copy this message and/or disclose the content to any other person. E-mails are susceptible to alteration. Neither Qosmos nor any of its subsidiaries or affiliates shall be liable for the message if altered, changed or falsified.
Ce message et toutes ses pièces jointes (ci-après le "message")sont confidentiels et établis à l'intention exclusive de ses destinataires. Si vous avez reçu ce message par erreur, merci d’en informer immédiatement son émetteur par courrier électronique et d’effacer ce message de votre système. Dans cette hypothèse, vous n’êtes pas autorisé à utiliser, copier ce message et/ou en divulguer le contenu à un tiers. Tout message électronique est susceptible d'altération. Qosmos et ses filiales déclinent toute responsabilité au titre de ce message s'il a été altéré, déformé ou falsifié.