TCP/IP bounty beta release
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Steffen Huber (91) 1953 posts |
There was “Universal Boot” for RISC OS 3.1x, which included the Internet module version 5, so pretty much up to date. As well as e.g. PPP, URL/HTTP fetcher module and AcornSSL, because of course !Browse needed it and Acorn seemed to be keen to provide “modern Internet access” to RISC OS 3.1 machines – after all, Toolbox and nested WIMP and even Java all ran on 3.1. About the only thing I could imagine where a HTTPS fetcher would be useful would be for a 3.1 port of PackMan to provide an easy way for 3.1 machines (inlcuding potentially emulators) to fetch software. Well, someone would need to build a RISC OS 3.1 software distribution then, the only thing currently available is probably ADFFS along with its Game JFDs. |
Rick Murray (539) 13840 posts |
I interpreted “part of the OS” to mean actually built in. A lot of stuff can be loaded afterwards (as the nested Wimp) but everything like that takes precious memory…
Of course, in 1997/1998 there would be rather more RISC OS 3.10 machines in use than there would be twenty years down the line.
Are you sure about that? I seem to recall Java wanting an 8MB WimpSlot before it would even start up.
There was also a lot of controversy over the Toolbox, again due to perceived bloat and memory restrictions. It was becoming quite clear that the 4MB which was mind-blowing in 1987 was titchy in 1997… and think about the sorts of sites that existed back then versus those which exist today. Google’s main page – a 238K HTML document (that Firefox’s Page Info incorrectly reports as 67.75K), supported by four script files with gibberish names totalling 792K, a 4K Privacy Shield icon that’s as laughably small as the shield itself is useless. Oh, and a nice Christmas animation adding up to 169K. |
Colin Ferris (399) 1814 posts |
If someone was real keen to run it on ro3.11 – what about the module ‘DummyDynamicAreas’ by J. Fletcher v1.23 (23 Dec 1998). Merry Xmas all – and a Healthy New Year. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8170 posts |
I’m not at all sure you can download Justins stuff from anywhere1, plus as he says himself in his Rambles “The error handling for the module was very poor – which was fine with me because this was intentionally hacky, just to make something that I could use with SpriteExtend.” Nice idea though. 1 I think some moron was abusive enough to him2 to cause him to obliterate as much of his online content as he could recall. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8170 posts |
Should have checked the Wayback machine before I posted because a good chunk is still in existence there for anyone with a nostalgic turn. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8170 posts |
Given the origin of our nice, new shiny SSL provision and peoples comments about using the appropriate socket this release note is interesting reading don’t you think? “Secure sockets |
Ronald (387) 195 posts |
For more information quote |
Frank de Bruijn (160) 228 posts |
For POP3 and SMTP, the unencrypted bit is the server greeting and capacity listing (POP3 response to the CAPA command or the SMTP EHLO response). The client then knows the server can handle secure connections and the handshake is started after the client sends STLS (POP3) or STARTTLS (SMTP). There was a time using port 587 for SMTP was considered the way to go and port 465 was ‘decommissioned’. However, ‘implicit TLS’ is now preferred again (see RFC 8314 – https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8314), so port 465 has been ‘reinstated’. |
Ronald (387) 195 posts |
However, ‘implicit TLS’ is now preferred again Been hunting and looking at the results, a wiki described port 25 and 587 as a normal port and 465 as an ssl port. 587 requires STARTTLS request, then probably moves you over to 465 anyway.Apparently, the “250 STARTTLS” has been subject to attacks, so it looks like direct (TLS only) on port 465 would be preferable by all accounts, thanks. Edit: The ports I have been using select implicit TLS OK but the !SMTPS that Alexander has was STARTTLS only. was enough to allow both port 587 and port 465 of gmail.com to work.I have emailed him a copy of the changed C file for perusal or improving on. |
Steve Revill (20) 1361 posts |
Hoorah! Our final beta (release 6) is now available. Changes are as below and unless there’s anything shocking found, we’re going to mark this one as closed and roll it into our ROM builds…
|
Chris Mahoney (1684) 2165 posts |
Sounds like we’re on the home stretch! I’ll give this a go when I get home, although I’m not doing anything strenuous with it :) Congratulations to everyone involved with getting this far. Edit: Confirmed working with my app, and no Filer_Run hackery needed! |
Andrew Rawnsley (492) 1445 posts |
Sorry to dredge this topic back up, but have just had a problem report from a RiscPC (StrongARM) user. Has anyone tested AcornSSL “properly” (ie. doing multiple fetches etc) on a RiscPC class machine? The user is reporting lots of timeouts and lost connections. We’ve already had to increase a lot of timeouts anyway, as AcornSSL seems to take a lot longer at various points to negotiate or return data. However, it is (give or take) fine on my machines, both VRPC 4.39 and ARMX6. Of course, these are both relatively nippy compared to a RiscPC! Before I “dig deep” and fund yet more programmer time on tracking this down, I’d appreciate any feedback from people running AcornSSL on RiscPCs as to success/failure/timeouts/speed. My gut is saying that perhaps the RiscPC simply lacks the grunt to do the job, but on the flip side, there are much “weedier” devices out there doing SSL transfers, and they can’t all be using out of date SSL! |
Doug Webb (190) 1180 posts |
Hi Andrew, I can’t do any testing until Sunday but if you can wait then will check the AcornSSL module out on a Kinetic enabled RiscPC. Do you know what processor the person who is having issues has in their machine and what OS? |
Andrew Rawnsley (492) 1445 posts |
I believe it was an ordinary SA but it may have had 4.39 OS. |
Doug Webb (190) 1180 posts |
Hi Andrew Well I have given the latest beta I have a whirl, it includes the a fixed version of Hermes 54903, and it took two stabs at downloading 1581 emails on one of my accounts. This is on a Kinetic RiscPC with 136Mb Ram, including 2MB VRam, and using a Unipod network/IDEFS and VPod graphics adaptor. It gave a connection lost error but I’ve also seen this on my ARMX6 on occasions as well when doing large numbers or simultaneous account downloads so I don’t think it is specific to older hardware. It could equally be the email server disconnecting if a download is taking a while. Anyway I’ll leaving it running for the rest of the day and let you know if I see any other issues. |
Doug Webb (190) 1180 posts |
OK so done some more testing and made 4 other email accounts live on the RiscPC and there is a definite increase in the number of lost connections on trying to transfer even when an account has no emails to fetch. I also got a System heap error but think that was as a result of a particular large download trying to debatch and failing. So seems there is something there as an issue. |
Doug Webb (190) 1180 posts |
Andrew, Detailed log of email session that resulted in a lost connection message. I have blanked off certain elements for security Hope this helps Doug Connecting to NB***** Blocked for security |
Rick Murray (539) 13840 posts |
My POP3 is rusty, but shouldn’t it send a |
Doug Webb (190) 1180 posts |
Hi Rick The only editing I have done, apart from removing time stamps, is the first line as I’ve blocked out the mail service I’m connecting to. Logging in as line, just after the CAPA command, where I have placed NB blanked out user in place of actual user details. And the final line where I have again blanked out the mail service. I have checked a good logging in and the only thing different is after the server signing off command at the end I get 3 additional lines/responses: Connected to NB **** blanked out mail service Again edited to remove service and user details. Edit: OK so got the same Connection lost error on another user and again the difference between a good mail connection is the last three lines after receiving the +OK Server signing off response. |
Andrew Rawnsley (492) 1445 posts |
Thanks for this. Do you have any other software that uses the module? I’d like to know if these timeouts are due to AcornSSL being demanding (ie. slow) or Hermes issues. The fact they seem more common on slow machines (coupled with no issues for non-SSL accounts) makes me think that AcornSSL is just abnormally slow. It could be a quirk of the module, exasperated by increasing number of connections and slower CPUs. Or, it could be that Hermes isn’t waiting long enough for responses. However, ROOL probably won’t appreciate me saying that without proof (quite reasonably), so other applications that use the module (eg. RiscOSM?) would be useful data points. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8170 posts |
:) More usefully, how well do both the elements do on the co-operative element of CMT? i.e. Is there a CPU time availability issue? Not releasing control of the wimp frequently enough. To test that kind of theory you’d need a simple SSL capable server instance and a RiscPC matching the problem machine sitting on a decent switch to throw files around locally and measure throughput (also do wireshark capture looking for re-transmits)
Well, if it’s an underlying issue with the behaviour of the NIC driver or similar then the user problem being on a non-ROOL derived OS might have a bearing on their view but if it’s at NIC level then finding and fixing would benefit all irrespective of code branch. Back to non-work related stuff Steve, you’re on leave. Keep saying it… |
Elesar (2416) 73 posts |
The new Making Tax Digital extension to Prophet uses AcornSSL for its data transfer – for both the initial OAuth log in, and subsequent JSON data exchanges. This has been extensively tested on a StrongARM Risc PC with RISC OS 4.02 (as well as a Titanium, naturally, and the interview with HMRC was done using a Raspberry Pi screen sharing over VNC). At no point have any timeouts been seen, probably between 70-100 transactions were needed in testing. It must be said though that the amount of data for a VAT return is relatively small, of the order of 1k. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8170 posts |
Which as you suggest isn’t likely to stress things, particularly buffers.
1 That’s SPAN for the Cisco droids. |
Doug Webb (190) 1180 posts |
I have RiscOSM and Recce and in the case of the latter even on the ARMX6 it is a bit hit and miss but I’ve put that down to it being version 1.00.
Well the one RiscPC has a Unipod plus 10Mb NIC which has v4.59 of the EtherH driver so I could test using both to see if there is any difference.
Well long , long time since I did anything like that and no managed switch here so I’ll have to pass on that but I agree it is the way to go on testing this. The only issue I have at the moment is time and therefore I will not have a big enough window on that until at least Friday or the weekend to do just to some testing. |
Matthew Phillips (473) 721 posts |
Sorry, I’ve not been keeping an eye on the forum the last week. If you could describe how Recce is “hit and miss” that would be helpful, because it may or may not be a problem I know about. I am aware of a difficulty with the AcornSSL module version 1.04. We distributed 1.03 with Recce but you may have 1.04 and I think that’s what Andrew is distributing with Hermes. The problem Recce is having won’t affect software that uses AcornSSL direct — it only affects fetching https content via the URL_Fetcher module. It seems that in some circumstances the contents is returned corrupted. In Recce this means pictures from Google StreetView come out slightly odd, and there may be an error about a failure to read licence descriptions for Flickr. I have reported the problem to the developers. |
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11