You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@nuttx.apache.org by Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com> on 2025/05/12 17:54:25 UTC
mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to allow
my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on the network.
It is using public domain software here: https://github.com/mjansson/mdns
Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no problem
plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature. Does
anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was public
domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it would be good
to include a link to the original work somewhere or other?
Sv: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Posted by "Alin.Jerpelea@sony.com" <Al...@sony.com>.
+1
thanks for the contribution
Best regards
Alin
________________________________
Från: Tomek CEDRO <to...@cedro.info>
Skickat: den 13 maj 2025 21:47
Till: dev@nuttx.apache.org <de...@nuttx.apache.org>
Ämne: Re: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Sounds good to share solutions between NuttX and Vela, thank you folks! :-) +1 for adding mdns to nuttx-apps :-) +1 for example apllication :-) +1 for documentation how this works and how to use :-) -- CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, https: //urldefense. com/v3/__http: //www. tomek. cedro. info__;!!O7_YSHcmd9jp3hj_4dEAcyQ!2LSc0LXTOmiLZj4iSbwiMkIrrutsFGS3sNy8rjNJPedRdKluDTI6xSvA32f-Cn29wCApNmv41_FZ7r_VNg$
Sounds good to share solutions between NuttX and Vela, thank you folks! :-)
+1 for adding mdns to nuttx-apps :-)
+1 for example apllication :-)
+1 for documentation how this works and how to use :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://www.tomek.cedro.info__;!!O7_YSHcmd9jp3hj_4dEAcyQ!2LSc0LXTOmiLZj4iSbwiMkIrrutsFGS3sNy8rjNJPedRdKluDTI6xSvA32f-Cn29wCApNmv41_FZ7r_VNg$
On Tue, May 13, 2025, 20:55 Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I will get it working in the way I need it (basic mDNS response to
> resolve a .local address for an appliance) and then submit it. It might
> benefit from a NuttX-specific example app to make it easier to
> understand for dimwits like me, so would include that too. With
> documentation :-)
>
> On 13/05/2025 19:14, Alan C. Assis wrote:
> > Hi Tim,
> >
> > I think everything that speeds up NuttX users development and makes user
> > experience easy is welcome!
> >
> > Please also include some basic Documentation/ explaining how to test it
> on
> > NuttX.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 3:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I have it working as a downloaded 3rd party utility, currently into my
> >> own personal Apps space rather than nuttx-apps. Would there be any
> >> benefit to others if I move it to apps/netutils and submit it as a PR?
> >> It works "out of the box" as a NuttX app or library, depending on
> >> Kconfig settings as per Xiang Xiao's links to open-vela.
> >>
> >> On 13/05/2025 15:20, Tim Hardisty wrote:
> >>> FANTASTIC - thanks Xiang Xiao. I love learning how to do things and
> >>> even better when I don't really have to do anything :-)
> >>>
> >>> On 13/05/2025 14:27, Xiang Xiao wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:07 PM Tim Hardisty <timhardisty63@gmail.com
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> See Greg's response below which didn't make it to the list.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> See comments inline below.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 13/05/2025 03:13, Gregory Nutt wrote:
> >>>>>> On 5/12/2025 11:54 AM, Tim Hardisty wrote:
> >>>>>>> I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to
> >>>>>>> allow my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on
> >>>>>>> the network.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It is using public domain software here:
> >>>>>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/mjansson/mdns__;!!O7_YSHcmd9jp3hj_4dEAcyQ!2LSc0LXTOmiLZj4iSbwiMkIrrutsFGS3sNy8rjNJPedRdKluDTI6xSvA32f-Cn29wCApNmv41_ESWRB8bg$
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
> >>>>>>> CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
> >>>> We have done the porting before, you can use it from here directly:
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/open-vela/external/tree/dev/mdns__;!!O7_YSHcmd9jp3hj_4dEAcyQ!2LSc0LXTOmiLZj4iSbwiMkIrrutsFGS3sNy8rjNJPedRdKluDTI6xSvA32f-Cn29wCApNmv41_GZQkFTYg$
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/open-vela/external_mdns__;!!O7_YSHcmd9jp3hj_4dEAcyQ!2LSc0LXTOmiLZj4iSbwiMkIrrutsFGS3sNy8rjNJPedRdKluDTI6xSvA32f-Cn29wCApNmv41_HJQntAWA$
> >>>>
> >>>>> If it uses *only* standard applications interfaces, to the OS then it
> >>>>>> is an application and should not be inside the OS. This is for
> >>>>>> modularity and security reasons. If it uses both standardized
> >>>>>> application interfaces and internal OS interfaces, then it belongs
> in
> >>>>>> libs/. If it uses *only* OS interfaces then it might be part of
> >>>>>> the OS.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> NOTE that OS and applications use a different set of interfaces with
> >>>>>> difference calling rules from application space. It is not portable
> >>>>>> between the either of the two contexts without some additional
> >>>>>> complexity and a fairly deep understanding of the OS interfaces.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Noted: but, all things being equal, would mDNS/DNS-SD be "better" in
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> OS or as an App (daemon)?
> >>>>>
> >>>> it should belong to the apps folder which is a normal library calling
> >>>> POSIX
> >>>> API.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no
> problem
> >>>>>>> plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature.
> >>>>>>> Does anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was
> >>>>>>> public domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it
> >>>>>>> would be good to include a link to the original work somewhere or
> >>>>>>> other?
> >>>>>> The ASF defines some very strict rules for the inclusion of 3rd part
> >>>>>> code. Make sure that any thing you want conforms to:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html__;!!O7_YSHcmd9jp3hj_4dEAcyQ!2LSc0LXTOmiLZj4iSbwiMkIrrutsFGS3sNy8rjNJPedRdKluDTI6xSvA32f-Cn29wCApNmv41_E9bbrzOw$ (official version)
> >>>>>> * https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html__;!!O7_YSHcmd9jp3hj_4dEAcyQ!2LSc0LXTOmiLZj4iSbwiMkIrrutsFGS3sNy8rjNJPedRdKluDTI6xSvA32f-Cn29wCApNmv41_E7PtFVHQ$ (previous version)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the links. The original code is tagged as being under the
> >>>>> "unlicense.org" rules and has the necessary disclaimers I think
> Apache
> >>>>> will want.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I may end up just using the PD code as inspiration and write my own
> >>>>> version, in which the "problem" goes away. Otherwise I will submit
> as a
> >>>>> draft PR and will see what others have to say - the question can be
> >>>>> submitted if needed to the Apache folk. But I'm a way away from being
> >>>>> ready for that anyway!
> >>>>>
> >>>> It's fine not adding the source code to repo directly, but
> >>>> downloading the
> >>>> code on demand, like many other 3rd party project:
> >>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/tree/master/benchmarks/coremark__;!!O7_YSHcmd9jp3hj_4dEAcyQ!2LSc0LXTOmiLZj4iSbwiMkIrrutsFGS3sNy8rjNJPedRdKluDTI6xSvA32f-Cn29wCApNmv41_FL3fFYKQ$
> >>>>
>
Re: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Posted by Tomek CEDRO <to...@cedro.info>.
Sounds good to share solutions between NuttX and Vela, thank you folks! :-)
+1 for adding mdns to nuttx-apps :-)
+1 for example apllication :-)
+1 for documentation how this works and how to use :-)
--
CeDeROM, SQ7MHZ, http://www.tomek.cedro.info
On Tue, May 13, 2025, 20:55 Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I will get it working in the way I need it (basic mDNS response to
> resolve a .local address for an appliance) and then submit it. It might
> benefit from a NuttX-specific example app to make it easier to
> understand for dimwits like me, so would include that too. With
> documentation :-)
>
> On 13/05/2025 19:14, Alan C. Assis wrote:
> > Hi Tim,
> >
> > I think everything that speeds up NuttX users development and makes user
> > experience easy is welcome!
> >
> > Please also include some basic Documentation/ explaining how to test it
> on
> > NuttX.
> >
> > BR,
> >
> > Alan
> >
> > On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 3:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I have it working as a downloaded 3rd party utility, currently into my
> >> own personal Apps space rather than nuttx-apps. Would there be any
> >> benefit to others if I move it to apps/netutils and submit it as a PR?
> >> It works "out of the box" as a NuttX app or library, depending on
> >> Kconfig settings as per Xiang Xiao's links to open-vela.
> >>
> >> On 13/05/2025 15:20, Tim Hardisty wrote:
> >>> FANTASTIC - thanks Xiang Xiao. I love learning how to do things and
> >>> even better when I don't really have to do anything :-)
> >>>
> >>> On 13/05/2025 14:27, Xiang Xiao wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:07 PM Tim Hardisty <timhardisty63@gmail.com
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> See Greg's response below which didn't make it to the list.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> See comments inline below.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 13/05/2025 03:13, Gregory Nutt wrote:
> >>>>>> On 5/12/2025 11:54 AM, Tim Hardisty wrote:
> >>>>>>> I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to
> >>>>>>> allow my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on
> >>>>>>> the network.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> It is using public domain software here:
> >>>>>>> https://github.com/mjansson/mdns
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
> >>>>>>> CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
> >>>> We have done the porting before, you can use it from here directly:
> >>>> https://github.com/open-vela/external/tree/dev/mdns
> >>>> https://github.com/open-vela/external_mdns
> >>>>
> >>>>> If it uses *only* standard applications interfaces, to the OS then it
> >>>>>> is an application and should not be inside the OS. This is for
> >>>>>> modularity and security reasons. If it uses both standardized
> >>>>>> application interfaces and internal OS interfaces, then it belongs
> in
> >>>>>> libs/. If it uses *only* OS interfaces then it might be part of
> >>>>>> the OS.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> NOTE that OS and applications use a different set of interfaces with
> >>>>>> difference calling rules from application space. It is not portable
> >>>>>> between the either of the two contexts without some additional
> >>>>>> complexity and a fairly deep understanding of the OS interfaces.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Noted: but, all things being equal, would mDNS/DNS-SD be "better" in
> >>>>> the
> >>>>> OS or as an App (daemon)?
> >>>>>
> >>>> it should belong to the apps folder which is a normal library calling
> >>>> POSIX
> >>>> API.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>>> Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no
> problem
> >>>>>>> plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature.
> >>>>>>> Does anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was
> >>>>>>> public domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it
> >>>>>>> would be good to include a link to the original work somewhere or
> >>>>>>> other?
> >>>>>> The ASF defines some very strict rules for the inclusion of 3rd part
> >>>>>> code. Make sure that any thing you want conforms to:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html (official version)
> >>>>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html (previous version)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>> Thanks for the links. The original code is tagged as being under the
> >>>>> "unlicense.org" rules and has the necessary disclaimers I think
> Apache
> >>>>> will want.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I may end up just using the PD code as inspiration and write my own
> >>>>> version, in which the "problem" goes away. Otherwise I will submit
> as a
> >>>>> draft PR and will see what others have to say - the question can be
> >>>>> submitted if needed to the Apache folk. But I'm a way away from being
> >>>>> ready for that anyway!
> >>>>>
> >>>> It's fine not adding the source code to repo directly, but
> >>>> downloading the
> >>>> code on demand, like many other 3rd party project:
> >>>> https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/tree/master/benchmarks/coremark
> >>>>
>
Re: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Posted by Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>.
I will get it working in the way I need it (basic mDNS response to
resolve a .local address for an appliance) and then submit it. It might
benefit from a NuttX-specific example app to make it easier to
understand for dimwits like me, so would include that too. With
documentation :-)
On 13/05/2025 19:14, Alan C. Assis wrote:
> Hi Tim,
>
> I think everything that speeds up NuttX users development and makes user
> experience easy is welcome!
>
> Please also include some basic Documentation/ explaining how to test it on
> NuttX.
>
> BR,
>
> Alan
>
> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 3:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I have it working as a downloaded 3rd party utility, currently into my
>> own personal Apps space rather than nuttx-apps. Would there be any
>> benefit to others if I move it to apps/netutils and submit it as a PR?
>> It works "out of the box" as a NuttX app or library, depending on
>> Kconfig settings as per Xiang Xiao's links to open-vela.
>>
>> On 13/05/2025 15:20, Tim Hardisty wrote:
>>> FANTASTIC - thanks Xiang Xiao. I love learning how to do things and
>>> even better when I don't really have to do anything :-)
>>>
>>> On 13/05/2025 14:27, Xiang Xiao wrote:
>>>> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> See Greg's response below which didn't make it to the list.
>>>>>
>>>>> See comments inline below.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 13/05/2025 03:13, Gregory Nutt wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/12/2025 11:54 AM, Tim Hardisty wrote:
>>>>>>> I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to
>>>>>>> allow my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on
>>>>>>> the network.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is using public domain software here:
>>>>>>> https://github.com/mjansson/mdns
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
>>>>>>> CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
>>>> We have done the porting before, you can use it from here directly:
>>>> https://github.com/open-vela/external/tree/dev/mdns
>>>> https://github.com/open-vela/external_mdns
>>>>
>>>>> If it uses *only* standard applications interfaces, to the OS then it
>>>>>> is an application and should not be inside the OS. This is for
>>>>>> modularity and security reasons. If it uses both standardized
>>>>>> application interfaces and internal OS interfaces, then it belongs in
>>>>>> libs/. If it uses *only* OS interfaces then it might be part of
>>>>>> the OS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> NOTE that OS and applications use a different set of interfaces with
>>>>>> difference calling rules from application space. It is not portable
>>>>>> between the either of the two contexts without some additional
>>>>>> complexity and a fairly deep understanding of the OS interfaces.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Noted: but, all things being equal, would mDNS/DNS-SD be "better" in
>>>>> the
>>>>> OS or as an App (daemon)?
>>>>>
>>>> it should belong to the apps folder which is a normal library calling
>>>> POSIX
>>>> API.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no problem
>>>>>>> plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature.
>>>>>>> Does anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was
>>>>>>> public domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it
>>>>>>> would be good to include a link to the original work somewhere or
>>>>>>> other?
>>>>>> The ASF defines some very strict rules for the inclusion of 3rd part
>>>>>> code. Make sure that any thing you want conforms to:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html (official version)
>>>>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html (previous version)
>>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the links. The original code is tagged as being under the
>>>>> "unlicense.org" rules and has the necessary disclaimers I think Apache
>>>>> will want.
>>>>>
>>>>> I may end up just using the PD code as inspiration and write my own
>>>>> version, in which the "problem" goes away. Otherwise I will submit as a
>>>>> draft PR and will see what others have to say - the question can be
>>>>> submitted if needed to the Apache folk. But I'm a way away from being
>>>>> ready for that anyway!
>>>>>
>>>> It's fine not adding the source code to repo directly, but
>>>> downloading the
>>>> code on demand, like many other 3rd party project:
>>>> https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/tree/master/benchmarks/coremark
>>>>
Re: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Posted by "Alan C. Assis" <ac...@gmail.com>.
Hi Tim,
I think everything that speeds up NuttX users development and makes user
experience easy is welcome!
Please also include some basic Documentation/ explaining how to test it on
NuttX.
BR,
Alan
On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 3:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I have it working as a downloaded 3rd party utility, currently into my
> own personal Apps space rather than nuttx-apps. Would there be any
> benefit to others if I move it to apps/netutils and submit it as a PR?
> It works "out of the box" as a NuttX app or library, depending on
> Kconfig settings as per Xiang Xiao's links to open-vela.
>
> On 13/05/2025 15:20, Tim Hardisty wrote:
> > FANTASTIC - thanks Xiang Xiao. I love learning how to do things and
> > even better when I don't really have to do anything :-)
> >
> > On 13/05/2025 14:27, Xiang Xiao wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> See Greg's response below which didn't make it to the list.
> >>>
> >>> See comments inline below.
> >>>
> >>> On 13/05/2025 03:13, Gregory Nutt wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On 5/12/2025 11:54 AM, Tim Hardisty wrote:
> >>>>> I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to
> >>>>> allow my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on
> >>>>> the network.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is using public domain software here:
> >>>>> https://github.com/mjansson/mdns
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
> >>>>> CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
> >> We have done the porting before, you can use it from here directly:
> >> https://github.com/open-vela/external/tree/dev/mdns
> >> https://github.com/open-vela/external_mdns
> >>
> >>> If it uses *only* standard applications interfaces, to the OS then it
> >>>> is an application and should not be inside the OS. This is for
> >>>> modularity and security reasons. If it uses both standardized
> >>>> application interfaces and internal OS interfaces, then it belongs in
> >>>> libs/. If it uses *only* OS interfaces then it might be part of
> >>>> the OS.
> >>>>
> >>>> NOTE that OS and applications use a different set of interfaces with
> >>>> difference calling rules from application space. It is not portable
> >>>> between the either of the two contexts without some additional
> >>>> complexity and a fairly deep understanding of the OS interfaces.
> >>>>
> >>> Noted: but, all things being equal, would mDNS/DNS-SD be "better" in
> >>> the
> >>> OS or as an App (daemon)?
> >>>
> >> it should belong to the apps folder which is a normal library calling
> >> POSIX
> >> API.
> >>
> >>
> >>>>> Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no problem
> >>>>> plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature.
> >>>>> Does anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was
> >>>>> public domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it
> >>>>> would be good to include a link to the original work somewhere or
> >>>>> other?
> >>>> The ASF defines some very strict rules for the inclusion of 3rd part
> >>>> code. Make sure that any thing you want conforms to:
> >>>>
> >>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html (official version)
> >>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html (previous version)
> >>>>
> >>> Thanks for the links. The original code is tagged as being under the
> >>> "unlicense.org" rules and has the necessary disclaimers I think Apache
> >>> will want.
> >>>
> >>> I may end up just using the PD code as inspiration and write my own
> >>> version, in which the "problem" goes away. Otherwise I will submit as a
> >>> draft PR and will see what others have to say - the question can be
> >>> submitted if needed to the Apache folk. But I'm a way away from being
> >>> ready for that anyway!
> >>>
> >> It's fine not adding the source code to repo directly, but
> >> downloading the
> >> code on demand, like many other 3rd party project:
> >> https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/tree/master/benchmarks/coremark
> >>
>
Re: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Posted by Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>.
I have it working as a downloaded 3rd party utility, currently into my
own personal Apps space rather than nuttx-apps. Would there be any
benefit to others if I move it to apps/netutils and submit it as a PR?
It works "out of the box" as a NuttX app or library, depending on
Kconfig settings as per Xiang Xiao's links to open-vela.
On 13/05/2025 15:20, Tim Hardisty wrote:
> FANTASTIC - thanks Xiang Xiao. I love learning how to do things and
> even better when I don't really have to do anything :-)
>
> On 13/05/2025 14:27, Xiang Xiao wrote:
>> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> See Greg's response below which didn't make it to the list.
>>>
>>> See comments inline below.
>>>
>>> On 13/05/2025 03:13, Gregory Nutt wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 5/12/2025 11:54 AM, Tim Hardisty wrote:
>>>>> I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to
>>>>> allow my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on
>>>>> the network.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is using public domain software here:
>>>>> https://github.com/mjansson/mdns
>>>>>
>>>>> Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
>>>>> CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
>> We have done the porting before, you can use it from here directly:
>> https://github.com/open-vela/external/tree/dev/mdns
>> https://github.com/open-vela/external_mdns
>>
>>> If it uses *only* standard applications interfaces, to the OS then it
>>>> is an application and should not be inside the OS. This is for
>>>> modularity and security reasons. If it uses both standardized
>>>> application interfaces and internal OS interfaces, then it belongs in
>>>> libs/. If it uses *only* OS interfaces then it might be part of
>>>> the OS.
>>>>
>>>> NOTE that OS and applications use a different set of interfaces with
>>>> difference calling rules from application space. It is not portable
>>>> between the either of the two contexts without some additional
>>>> complexity and a fairly deep understanding of the OS interfaces.
>>>>
>>> Noted: but, all things being equal, would mDNS/DNS-SD be "better" in
>>> the
>>> OS or as an App (daemon)?
>>>
>> it should belong to the apps folder which is a normal library calling
>> POSIX
>> API.
>>
>>
>>>>> Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no problem
>>>>> plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature.
>>>>> Does anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was
>>>>> public domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it
>>>>> would be good to include a link to the original work somewhere or
>>>>> other?
>>>> The ASF defines some very strict rules for the inclusion of 3rd part
>>>> code. Make sure that any thing you want conforms to:
>>>>
>>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html (official version)
>>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html (previous version)
>>>>
>>> Thanks for the links. The original code is tagged as being under the
>>> "unlicense.org" rules and has the necessary disclaimers I think Apache
>>> will want.
>>>
>>> I may end up just using the PD code as inspiration and write my own
>>> version, in which the "problem" goes away. Otherwise I will submit as a
>>> draft PR and will see what others have to say - the question can be
>>> submitted if needed to the Apache folk. But I'm a way away from being
>>> ready for that anyway!
>>>
>> It's fine not adding the source code to repo directly, but
>> downloading the
>> code on demand, like many other 3rd party project:
>> https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/tree/master/benchmarks/coremark
>>
Re: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Posted by Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>.
FANTASTIC - thanks Xiang Xiao. I love learning how to do things and even
better when I don't really have to do anything :-)
On 13/05/2025 14:27, Xiang Xiao wrote:
> On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> See Greg's response below which didn't make it to the list.
>>
>> See comments inline below.
>>
>> On 13/05/2025 03:13, Gregory Nutt wrote:
>>>
>>> On 5/12/2025 11:54 AM, Tim Hardisty wrote:
>>>> I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to
>>>> allow my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on
>>>> the network.
>>>>
>>>> It is using public domain software here:
>>>> https://github.com/mjansson/mdns
>>>>
>>>> Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
>>>> CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
> We have done the porting before, you can use it from here directly:
> https://github.com/open-vela/external/tree/dev/mdns
> https://github.com/open-vela/external_mdns
>
>> If it uses *only* standard applications interfaces, to the OS then it
>>> is an application and should not be inside the OS. This is for
>>> modularity and security reasons. If it uses both standardized
>>> application interfaces and internal OS interfaces, then it belongs in
>>> libs/. If it uses *only* OS interfaces then it might be part of the OS.
>>>
>>> NOTE that OS and applications use a different set of interfaces with
>>> difference calling rules from application space. It is not portable
>>> between the either of the two contexts without some additional
>>> complexity and a fairly deep understanding of the OS interfaces.
>>>
>> Noted: but, all things being equal, would mDNS/DNS-SD be "better" in the
>> OS or as an App (daemon)?
>>
> it should belong to the apps folder which is a normal library calling POSIX
> API.
>
>
>>>> Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no problem
>>>> plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature.
>>>> Does anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was
>>>> public domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it
>>>> would be good to include a link to the original work somewhere or other?
>>> The ASF defines some very strict rules for the inclusion of 3rd part
>>> code. Make sure that any thing you want conforms to:
>>>
>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html (official version)
>>> * https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html (previous version)
>>>
>> Thanks for the links. The original code is tagged as being under the
>> "unlicense.org" rules and has the necessary disclaimers I think Apache
>> will want.
>>
>> I may end up just using the PD code as inspiration and write my own
>> version, in which the "problem" goes away. Otherwise I will submit as a
>> draft PR and will see what others have to say - the question can be
>> submitted if needed to the Apache folk. But I'm a way away from being
>> ready for that anyway!
>>
> It's fine not adding the source code to repo directly, but downloading the
> code on demand, like many other 3rd party project:
> https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/tree/master/benchmarks/coremark
>
Re: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Posted by Xiang Xiao <xi...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, May 13, 2025 at 8:07 PM Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> See Greg's response below which didn't make it to the list.
>
> See comments inline below.
>
> On 13/05/2025 03:13, Gregory Nutt wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 5/12/2025 11:54 AM, Tim Hardisty wrote:
> >> I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to
> >> allow my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on
> >> the network.
> >>
> >> It is using public domain software here:
> >> https://github.com/mjansson/mdns
> >>
> >> Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
> >> CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
> >
>
We have done the porting before, you can use it from here directly:
https://github.com/open-vela/external/tree/dev/mdns
https://github.com/open-vela/external_mdns
> If it uses *only* standard applications interfaces, to the OS then it
> > is an application and should not be inside the OS. This is for
> > modularity and security reasons. If it uses both standardized
> > application interfaces and internal OS interfaces, then it belongs in
> > libs/. If it uses *only* OS interfaces then it might be part of the OS.
> >
> > NOTE that OS and applications use a different set of interfaces with
> > difference calling rules from application space. It is not portable
> > between the either of the two contexts without some additional
> > complexity and a fairly deep understanding of the OS interfaces.
> >
> Noted: but, all things being equal, would mDNS/DNS-SD be "better" in the
> OS or as an App (daemon)?
>
it should belong to the apps folder which is a normal library calling POSIX
API.
> >
> >>
> >> Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no problem
> >> plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature.
> >> Does anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was
> >> public domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it
> >> would be good to include a link to the original work somewhere or other?
> >
> > The ASF defines some very strict rules for the inclusion of 3rd part
> > code. Make sure that any thing you want conforms to:
> >
> > * https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html (official version)
> > * https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html (previous version)
> >
> Thanks for the links. The original code is tagged as being under the
> "unlicense.org" rules and has the necessary disclaimers I think Apache
> will want.
>
> I may end up just using the PD code as inspiration and write my own
> version, in which the "problem" goes away. Otherwise I will submit as a
> draft PR and will see what others have to say - the question can be
> submitted if needed to the Apache folk. But I'm a way away from being
> ready for that anyway!
>
It's fine not adding the source code to repo directly, but downloading the
code on demand, like many other 3rd party project:
https://github.com/apache/nuttx-apps/tree/master/benchmarks/coremark
Re: mDNS - apps utility or kernel? And licensing
Posted by Tim Hardisty <ti...@gmail.com>.
See Greg's response below which didn't make it to the list.
See comments inline below.
On 13/05/2025 03:13, Gregory Nutt wrote:
>
>
> On 5/12/2025 11:54 AM, Tim Hardisty wrote:
>> I am adding mDNS/DNS-SD query responder software to my project to
>> allow my NuttX "appliance" to be identified as a ".local" device on
>> the network.
>>
>> It is using public domain software here:
>> https://github.com/mjansson/mdns
>>
>> Firstly: would this be best done as part of the kernel under the
>> CONFIG_NET umbrella; or as an app as a NETUTILS feature?
>
> If it uses *only* standard applications interfaces, to the OS then it
> is an application and should not be inside the OS. This is for
> modularity and security reasons. If it uses both standardized
> application interfaces and internal OS interfaces, then it belongs in
> libs/. If it uses *only* OS interfaces then it might be part of the OS.
>
> NOTE that OS and applications use a different set of interfaces with
> difference calling rules from application space. It is not portable
> between the either of the two contexts without some additional
> complexity and a fairly deep understanding of the OS interfaces.
>
Noted: but, all things being equal, would mDNS/DNS-SD be "better" in the
OS or as an App (daemon)?
>
>>
>> Secondly: my read of the PD license is that there would be no problem
>> plundering the necessary code and submitting it as a NuttX feature.
>> Does anyone disagree - for example is an Apache license of what was
>> public domain software not a good/nice/allowed thing? I assume it
>> would be good to include a link to the original work somewhere or other?
>
> The ASF defines some very strict rules for the inclusion of 3rd part
> code. Make sure that any thing you want conforms to:
>
> * https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html (official version)
> * https://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html (previous version)
>
Thanks for the links. The original code is tagged as being under the
"unlicense.org" rules and has the necessary disclaimers I think Apache
will want.
I may end up just using the PD code as inspiration and write my own
version, in which the "problem" goes away. Otherwise I will submit as a
draft PR and will see what others have to say - the question can be
submitted if needed to the Apache folk. But I'm a way away from being
ready for that anyway!