[ros-users] ROS & DDS

[Jonathan Bohren]

So, back when ROS was in its infancy, Willow brought in representatives
from a ton of different robotics middleware projects to see if there was
something that would satisfy their needs. That was about 7 years ago.

Maybe OSRF could do something similar, now, and have a meeting or
teleconference or videochat with lead developers involved with a bunch of
industry transport frameworks that it's considering (dds, zmq, etc). Then
you guys could get their opinions on all of the issues that have been
brought up in this thread?

It could be an interesting discussion and if it's on Google+ it could make
for a really engaging live hangout, too. This would involve the community
in real-time and enable people to ask questions or comment on their needs.

-j
On Feb 23, 2014 12:45 AM, "William Woodall" <william at osrfoundation.org>
wrote:

> We will definitely look at it as an option, but the GPL license isn't
> ideal since the rest of our work is generally BSD or Apache 2.0.
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Ben Kehoe <benk at berkeley.edu> wrote:
>
>> Is ZeroC's ICE under consideration? It seems like it has a lot of the
>> features people have been discussing, including encryption and compression,
>> ability to reduce inter-host communication for topics, distributed
>> registries, and even ROS-like parameters (though they live on each
>> component rather than on a central parameter server). It has a pretty
>> similar though more general message format.
>>
>> --Ben
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 12:16 AM, Geoffrey Biggs <
>> geoffrey.biggs at aist.go.jp> wrote:
>>
>>> On 21/02/14 08:45, Brian Gerkey wrote:
>>> > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 3:26 PM, Aravind Sundaresan
>>> > <asundaresan at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> We are using ROS in a DARPA program where we need the communication
>>> between
>>> >> the master and nodes as well as the messaging to be secure. Is there
>>> anybody
>>> >> else who finds this important? Does DDS provide secure communications?
>>> >
>>> > You're not alone in wanting secure communications for robotics.  We
>>> > would be remiss in a major rewrite to completely ignore security
>>> > (which is not to say that we must implement security mechanisms, but
>>> > we'd better at least end up with a solid story about our approach to
>>> > security, with clear guidance to users).
>>> >
>>> > As I understand it, there's a proposed extension to the DDS spec,
>>> > currently under review, to add security.  Here's a relevant
>>> > presentation:
>>> >
>>> > http://www.slideshare.net/GerardoPardo/dds-security-standard
>>> >
>>> > But given that DDS is apparently used in so many mission-critical
>>> > applications, surely there's some encryption happening, perhaps in
>>> > non-standard vendor-specific ways that vary by implementation?  Or
>>> > perhaps they're using DDS like we use ROS, where you're expected
>>> > secure your network.
>>>
>>> The answer to this is more along the lines of the original target
>>> audience of DDS operating private/closed networks. When all your
>>> communication happens within a single Navy frigate on dedicated
>>> communication wires, security is less problematic. DDS growing beyond
>>> its original audience has caused many vendors to start thinking about
>>> how to do security. A VPN is one option, but obviously many users want
>>> something a bit lighter weight.
>>>
>>> Geoff
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ros-users mailing list
>>> ros-users at lists.ros.org
>>> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ros-users mailing list
>> ros-users at lists.ros.org
>> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> William Woodall
> ROS Development Team
> william at osrfoundation.org
> http://williamjwoodall.com/
>
> _______________________________________________
> ros-users mailing list
> ros-users at lists.ros.org
> http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.ros.org/pipermail/ros-users/attachments/20140223/08c8bfed/attachment.html>