mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Butler <crodste...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: stun server based on mina
Date Sat, 26 May 2007 16:44:39 GMT
Since your considering licenses...

An Apache or BSD license will allow the most people to use your code.  Even with these licenses
there is little chance of someone forking your code into another open source project.  People
will be able to fork your code for commercial use or use it in commercial products though.
 If you have no commercial interests in your code I would recommend either of these licenses.
 BSD is probably slightly better than Apache just because it's rather simple from a legal

LGPL will prevent a few people from using your code, but not too many.  This license would
still allow your code to be used in commercial projects as well, but modifications to your
code would have to be contributed back to the community.

GPL is possibly the most restrictive open-source license from the standpoint of who can use
your code for what purposes.  Ideologically it provides the most freedom because your code
can never be used in a closed source application.  If you don't want people using your code
in a commercial application without paying you a fee use this license.

I wouldn't bother considering any of the other open source licenses.  These 4 are really solid
and should allow you to decide how restrictive/ ideological you want to be.  There are some
rather interesting licenses that do things like require attribution if used to provide a service,
(like a powered by tag on a web-page) or have other similar clauses, but in my opinion all
of these types of licenses are just a pain in the butt.

I am not a lawyer, so don't take any of this as legal advice.  But I thought the above might
be helpful in your decision making process.


----- Original Message ----
From: Adam Fisk <adamfisk@gmail.com>
To: dev@mina.apache.org
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2007 10:38:23 AM
Subject: Re: stun server based on mina

It's a STUN server I just wrote from scratch, and I haven't done any
performance testing on it yet.  Overall I've found MINA to be easier to use
for binary protocols that plain text protocols, although I guess that's
generally the case.

Note the STUN server's not complete by any means.  All I need it for is the
binding request and response at this point to get your public address, so
I'm not using the shared secret or anything like that.  It is using the very
latest STUN draft, though, with the magic cookie handling and all of that.

It's not public yet, but we'll be releasing it as open source in the next
few months (not 100% sure on the license yet).  If you want the code, drop
me a line.  It's well tested and a straightforward, clean implementation.


On 5/26/07, Horace Pinker <flipcode2002@yahoo.com> wrote:
> hi adam,
> could you tell us more about your stun server implementation? how does
> mina perform? is your stun server a port ?
> thanks.adam fisk wrote:
> Quick note:  I'm not trying to spark a Grizzly/MINA battle by any
> means.  I
> just started using MINA after having implemented several generic NIO
> frameworks myself, and I absolutely love MINA's approach.  It allowed me
> to
> code a STUN server in 2 days, and I'm porting my SIP server now.
> ____________________________________________________________________________________Choose
> the right car based on your needs.  Check out Yahoo! Autos new Car Finder
> tool.
> http://autos.yahoo.com/carfinder/

Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.

View raw message