Network data exchange - Basys and Seamless usage questioning

Can you show example how you work with your objects using this network?  

BasisNetworkStub is only created for tests. And I think it misses one important function: how identify peers. When your image get new connection it should identify what remote peer is connected by it. So two connections from same remote image should be identified as single peer instance on your local image. 

I would of course use Seamless for distributed applications because it allows to implement solution with objects locally and then transparently split them over network. 

But Seamless not implements any kind of message queue. So I would use some proven solution for it instead of custom implementation. But it can depends on the task.

  

2) or may I use Seamless straight with restrictions (I wonder if limiting the classes that can be executed would suffice - proxies should only be on the peer inbox and outbox I think) ? 

3) or maybe I should do a lighter version of seamless ? If so where should I look at/change ?

You can try subclass SeamlessNetwork and override request processing method with special restrictions on what requests are permitted. Maybe you can propose such kind of policy to the Seamless itself.

network remotePeers do: [:each | each sendDataPackage: myNewLocalData].   

YourNetwork>> process: anExchangeData receivedFrom: aRemotePeer

inboxQueue add: anExchangeData

2017-11-16 17:11 GMT+01:00 henry <[hidden email]>:

Have you seen ParrotTalk?

http://www.squeaksource.com/Cryptography/ParrotTalk-HenryHouse.14.mcz

Requiring

http://www.squeaksource.com/Cryptography/Cryptography-HenryHouse.113.mcz

Where could I find Seamless? I am doing similar with a project Raven: distributed objects over encrypted ASN.1/STON encoded connections.

https://github.com/dionisiydk/Seamless

 

Thank you.

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 18:09, Cédrick Béler <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

sorry for the late reply Denis, 

Can you show example how you work with your objects using this network?  

It’s not fully decided yet. I’m just trying to show that 2 peers A and B can exchange and sync information without central server, but also considering they have multiples devices (connected on demand P2P - offline first is a major requirement).

So for now, to test, I just connect A and B through basys by sending a connection in both direction A->B B->A. I think ok keeping a "message hub » specific to each interaction A can have with B(s), C(s)... A queue but that kind of never deletes messages but changes its meta content - so as to sync with other devices when they eventually connect).

So for now, my need is quite simple regarding connections.

I used mostly for now #sendDataPacket: 

I could do it also with Zinc in HTTP. But, as always in Smalltalk, I explore in plenty of directions and discover great stuffs like Seamless perfectly usable and some less finished or older gems like BitTalk or UbiquiTalk…  Very interesting as I will need more functionalities to deal with decentralized networks.

BasisNetworkStub is only created for tests. And I think it misses one important function: how identify peers. When your image get new connection it should identify what remote peer is connected by it. So two connections from same remote image should be identified as single peer instance on your local image. 

Yes, sure I’ve spotted that and I definitely need a way to identify peer-devices (belonging to a peer realm/swarm). I’ll do later.

I would of course use Seamless for distributed applications because it allows to implement solution with objects locally and then transparently split them over network. 

But Seamless not implements any kind of message queue. So I would use some proven solution for it instead of custom implementation. But it can depends on the task.

Do you think of something in particular ? :)

For now my queue will only be ordered collections or whatever simple collection. It should be enough to start with.

  

2) or may I use Seamless straight with restrictions (I wonder if limiting the classes that can be executed would suffice - proxies should only be on the peer inbox and outbox I think) ? 

3) or maybe I should do a lighter version of seamless ? If so where should I look at/change ?

You can try subclass SeamlessNetwork and override request processing method with special restrictions on what requests are permitted. Maybe you can propose such kind of policy to the Seamless itself.

Subclassing Seamless seems to be a very good simple and powerful possibility (to get inspiration too) and I may do that. 

Anyway most of what I have to do is build a system that seamlessly present to the user information extracted from messages (stored locally- versioned) => its actually just transposing what you all are used too with tools like git but applied to « general information exchange and processing ».

Enterprise information systems are so boring… they should be far more a la smalltalk ^^ 

Cheers,

Cédrick

Hi, Henry.

Just follow instructions on github page. Do you have any problem with them? (I ask because you probably noticed it).

Also look at main application built on top of Seamless: TelePharo project https://github.com/dionisiydk/TelePharo, http://dionisiydk.blogspot.fr/2017/08/pharmide-is-renamed-to-telepharo-and.html. 

Seamless does not provide any security option. So now it is up to user to establish secure network with external tools like SSH or VPN.

So it can be interesting to implement it with your solution. But I have no time to work on it.

2017-11-17 15:26 GMT+01:00 henry <[hidden email]>:

From my years of Squeaking, I only ever us Monticello Browser. As one new to our using github, Metacello and Pharo, could you explain how I would load Seamless? I think it is a Metacello command. I am very interested in seeing how it runs on ParrotTalk and thought I would explore this system.

Thank you

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Thu, Nov 16, 2017 at 11:14, Denis Kudriashov <[hidden email]> wrote:

2017-11-16 17:11 GMT+01:00 henry <[hidden email]>:

Have you seen ParrotTalk?

http://www.squeaksource.com/Cryptography/ParrotTalk-HenryHouse.14.mcz

Requiring

http://www.squeaksource.com/Cryptography/Cryptography-HenryHouse.113.mcz

Where could I find Seamless? I am doing similar with a project Raven: distributed objects over encrypted ASN.1/STON encoded connections.

https://github.com/dionisiydk/Seamless

 

Thank you.

Sent from ProtonMail Mobile

On Wed, Nov 15, 2017 at 18:09, Cédrick Béler <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,

sorry for the late reply Denis, 

Can you show example how you work with your objects using this network?  

It’s not fully decided yet. I’m just trying to show that 2 peers A and B can exchange and sync information without central server, but also considering they have multiples devices (connected on demand P2P - offline first is a major requirement).

So for now, to test, I just connect A and B through basys by sending a connection in both direction A->B B->A. I think ok keeping a "message hub » specific to each interaction A can have with B(s), C(s)... A queue but that kind of never deletes messages but changes its meta content - so as to sync with other devices when they eventually connect).

So for now, my need is quite simple regarding connections.

I used mostly for now #sendDataPacket: 

I could do it also with Zinc in HTTP. But, as always in Smalltalk, I explore in plenty of directions and discover great stuffs like Seamless perfectly usable and some less finished or older gems like BitTalk or UbiquiTalk…  Very interesting as I will need more functionalities to deal with decentralized networks.

BasisNetworkStub is only created for tests. And I think it misses one important function: how identify peers. When your image get new connection it should identify what remote peer is connected by it. So two connections from same remote image should be identified as single peer instance on your local image. 

Yes, sure I’ve spotted that and I definitely need a way to identify peer-devices (belonging to a peer realm/swarm). I’ll do later.

I would of course use Seamless for distributed applications because it allows to implement solution with objects locally and then transparently split them over network. 

But Seamless not implements any kind of message queue. So I would use some proven solution for it instead of custom implementation. But it can depends on the task.

Do you think of something in particular ? :)

For now my queue will only be ordered collections or whatever simple collection. It should be enough to start with.

  

2) or may I use Seamless straight with restrictions (I wonder if limiting the classes that can be executed would suffice - proxies should only be on the peer inbox and outbox I think) ? 

3) or maybe I should do a lighter version of seamless ? If so where should I look at/change ?

You can try subclass SeamlessNetwork and override request processing method with special restrictions on what requests are permitted. Maybe you can propose such kind of policy to the Seamless itself.

Subclassing Seamless seems to be a very good simple and powerful possibility (to get inspiration too) and I may do that. 

Anyway most of what I have to do is build a system that seamlessly present to the user information extracted from messages (stored locally- versioned) => its actually just transposing what you all are used too with tools like git but applied to « general information exchange and processing ».

Enterprise information systems are so boring… they should be far more a la smalltalk ^^ 

Cheers,

Cédrick

Have you seen ParrotTalk?

http://www.squeaksource.com/Cryptography/ParrotTalk-HenryHouse.14.mcz

Lets say image A1, A2, A3 belongs to Alice. And image B1, B2, … to Bob.

They exchange messages conveying information. So the aim of the network layer is for me to keep messages synchronized betweens A(s) and B(s). I have inbox and outbox for that. This is actually quite close to the basys abstractions on LocalPeer and RemotePeer (active and passive).

So I played a bit with basys and can declare a network between A1 and B1 for instance. I wonder if I need as much network as possible connection (A1B1 A1B2 … but also A1A2, A1A3, A2A3, …). Not sure how to declare network with more than 2 nodes…

Probably not but if you have different purpose of connecting A<->A nodes and connecting A<->B nodes then it can be suitable to have separate networks for that. But it is difficult to answer without more information.

I imaging following schema: 

On each node you have single network instance. 

Let's say we have node A1. Then other A1, A2 and B nodes connect to A1. By Basys logic they will be represented by remote peers inside A1 network instance. So you are able to enumerate all connected peers and sync some local information with them:

network remotePeers do: [:each | each sendDataPackage: myNewLocalData].   

And for incoming messages you can put them into inbox collection stored inside network instance:

YourNetwork>> process: anExchangeData receivedFrom: aRemotePeer

inboxQueue add: anExchangeData

And you can have separate process which handle this queue.

So in that case I do not see the reason to create multiple instances of network for each pair of connected nodes. 

What you think? Is my example relevant to your case?