[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Phasing out ldm4 protocols

On Tue, 13 Apr 1999, Glenn P. Davis wrote:

> (Continuing pruning the ldm distribution.)
> 
> I understand that WSI is still sending data using ldm4 protocols.
> I also understand that there is not much we can do about this.
> 
This was talked about at the last AMS meeting, I didn't hear what the
outcome was of the meeting. I relayed that the ldm4 protocol was going
away and WSI should be made aware.  We need to refresh WSI memory about
the ldm4 protocol situation.   WSI has a current solution, just use the
LDM instead of their own written s/w.  The LDM has sufficient access
controls to satisfy WSI needs.  


> Let us define "ldm4 receive support" to mean that if someone like
> WSI sends data to an LDM server, that it is accepted and stuck in
> the queue as it is now. (LDM4 procedures HEREIS, COMINGSOON, & BLOCKDATA)
> 
> Let us further define "ldm4 transmit support"  to be the support
> of ldm4 data sinks by an ldm server. (LDM4 procedures NOTIFYME & FEEDME)
> 
> Any objections to dropping "ldm4 transmit support"?
> This means that an ldm4 downstream node could not request data from
> an ldm5 server.

I agree, let's drop transmit support.  There might be one or two sites
currently using ldm4 s/w.  It's hard to support these sites because the
current version verses ldm4 are different enough plus other factors that
support is almost impossible. Also, the ldm4 support is too time consuming
because it would have to be built on the platform, etc.

Robb...


> 
> -glenn
> 

===============================================================================
Robb Kambic                                Unidata Program Center
Software Engineer III                      Univ. Corp for Atmospheric Research
address@hidden             WWW: http://www.unidata.ucar.edu/
===============================================================================