Re: ANN: DynDNS update client for VMS
- From: Mark Daniel <mark.daniel@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 15:00:42 +0930
David J. Dachtera wrote:
Mark Daniel wrote:
Recent discussion of a DynDNS update client
in this forum prompted me to do something I'd been meaning to for years
- put together a native version for VMS and move the update duties from
my PC to my VMS system. It has now been running for some four weeks
without too many hiccoughs so you are welcome to give it a go as well.
It requires the HP [Open]SSL product to be installed and started.
A complementary application included, DynDNSrpt, is a CGI Web server
application that can be used as a basic reporting tool for the above
application (should be suitable for Apache, OSU, Purveyor and WASD).
Setup, build instructions and revision log for each may be found in the
source code each of the respective applications once restored.
A ZIPed source-code kit (it is assumed users will be VMS
enthusiasts/hobbiests with their own compiler) is available from
Hope it's useful.
Just wondering if this has any advantage over the WGET approach?
Don't know David. I'm aware of the DCL-based utility that uses WGET because of the recent discussion here that mentioned it. I didn't use it as a reference when putting together my own though and so I'm not aware of what it can (or can't do).
When I first started to use DynDNS DDNS for my domestic network some time ago I looked around for a VMS update client but only remember finding Perl and DCL based utilities that would have been suitable (perhaps I quit searching too quickly). I decided then to write something 'native' (i.e. an executable) sometime and fell back to using a pre-packaged WIN32 client on my Windows-based desktop in the meantime. Well, I put it off and put it off until the recent enquiry during a period with some spare time reminded me.
Why use this new one? No big reason I suppose. If something else is working working for you well and good. I can't make a comparison with the WGET approach because I haven't used it. However, the original announcement might have been a bit thin so I'll list some of the new offering's attributes:
o C code
o single image in a RUN/DETACHED process
o light-weight process and activity
o uses SSL to secure the credentials of the update
o logs activity through file and logical names
o neat little reporting utility available as a CGI script
Also (but not public attributes)
o provided me some exercise writing BSD sockets based code
o provided me some exercise writing BSD sockets based SSL code
Profit margins are minimal so if you don't need it I probably won't miss you not buying it :-)