102 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
102 lines
2.9 KiB
Markdown
|
# Phase 5: TAK Server Research & Selection
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Goal
|
||
|
|
Research and select the optimal TAK-compatible server with web interface for team coordination and offsite operator integration.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Research Requirements
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Research Method
|
||
|
|
Use DuckDuckGo tool for comprehensive web research on TAK-compatible implementations.
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Key Research Areas
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
1. **TAK-Compatible Implementations**
|
||
|
|
- Open-source TAK-compatible servers
|
||
|
|
- Web interface capabilities
|
||
|
|
- COT (Cursor-on-Target) protocol support
|
||
|
|
- Geospatial mapping integration
|
||
|
|
- Mobile device support
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2. **Feature Comparison**
|
||
|
|
- User interface: web-based vs desktop vs mobile
|
||
|
|
- Mapping capabilities: OpenStreetMap, Mapbox, custom maps
|
||
|
|
- Message types: text, COT, chat, file sharing
|
||
|
|
- Authentication: OAuth, JWT, LDAP, basic auth
|
||
|
|
- Persistence: database options, storage requirements
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
3. **Deployment Requirements**
|
||
|
|
- Hardware needs: CPU, memory, storage
|
||
|
|
- Network requirements: ports, protocols, firewall rules
|
||
|
|
- Dependency requirements: databases, message brokers
|
||
|
|
- Scalability: single-node vs clustered deployments
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
4. **Security Considerations**
|
||
|
|
- Data encryption: in-transit and at-rest
|
||
|
|
- Authentication mechanisms
|
||
|
|
- Authorization models
|
||
|
|
- Audit logging capabilities
|
||
|
|
- Vulnerability history
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
5. **Integration Capabilities**
|
||
|
|
- REST API availability
|
||
|
|
- WebSocket support for real-time updates
|
||
|
|
- External authentication providers
|
||
|
|
- Custom plugin/system integration
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Research Process
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
1. **Discovery Phase**
|
||
|
|
- Use DuckDuckGo to search for "open source TAK server"
|
||
|
|
- Identify 5-10 potential implementations
|
||
|
|
- Document source repositories and documentation
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2. **Evaluation Phase**
|
||
|
|
- Review README files and documentation
|
||
|
|
- Check GitHub stars, activity, and maintenance status
|
||
|
|
- Evaluate feature completeness against requirements
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
3. **Selection Phase**
|
||
|
|
- Create comparison matrix of top 3 candidates
|
||
|
|
- Document pros and cons of each option
|
||
|
|
- Select optimal implementation based on criteria
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Deliverables
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
1. **Research Report** (PLAN.md)
|
||
|
|
- Summary of findings
|
||
|
|
- Comparison of top 3 implementations
|
||
|
|
- Recommendation with justification
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
2. **Implementation Plan**
|
||
|
|
- Deployment strategy
|
||
|
|
- Configuration requirements
|
||
|
|
- Integration approach
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Selection Criteria
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Must Have:**
|
||
|
|
- Open-source license
|
||
|
|
- Web interface
|
||
|
|
- COT protocol support
|
||
|
|
- Geospatial mapping
|
||
|
|
- Docker deployment support
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
**Nice to Have:**
|
||
|
|
- Active maintenance
|
||
|
|
- Good documentation
|
||
|
|
- Community support
|
||
|
|
- REST API for integration
|
||
|
|
- Mobile client availability
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Timeline
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- Research completion: [Estimated date]
|
||
|
|
- Decision finalized: [Estimated date]
|
||
|
|
- Ready to proceed to Phase 6: [Estimated date]
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Notes
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
- Focus on implementations that can be containerized
|
||
|
|
- Prioritize solutions with good documentation
|
||
|
|
- Consider long-term maintenance and support
|
||
|
|
- Document all research findings for future reference
|