mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Adam Fisk" <adamf...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: stun server based on mina
Date Sat, 26 May 2007 18:10:30 GMT
Hi Rob-  Thanks for the advice.  I do have a commercial interest in my
code.  I'll be releasing a whole bunch of java libraries over the next few
months for my p2p startup's first application, "LittleShoot".  There'll be a
STUN client+server, SIP client+server, TURN client+server, multi-source
downloader (very fast one), reliable UDP layer, ICE implementation for TCP
and UDP NAT traversal, etc, etc all as very modular separate libraries.  I'm
funding everything myself, so I need to make money on it eventually.

I'm considering licensing different pieces under different licenses, some
BSD and some GPL, depending on whether I see participation or protection as
more important for that module.

This is off topic, but out of curiosity how many people reading this would
contribute and/or use something under a BSD license where they would not
with something under the GPL?

I'm happy to take this discussion elsewhere if it's bothersome to anyone.  A
lot of the modules will be using MINA, though (SIP, STUN, TURN), so it's
remotely relevant.


On 5/26/07, Rob Butler <crodster2k@yahoo.com> wrote:
> 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 standpoint.
> 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.
> Rob
> ----- 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.
> -Adam
> 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.
> http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message