- Comprehensive research of TAK-compatible open-source implementations - Comparison of FreeTAKServer, OpenTAKServer, and TAK Product Center Server - Selected OpenTAKServer for feature richness and Docker deployment support - Documented research findings and implementation plan
2.9 KiB
2.9 KiB
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
-
TAK-Compatible Implementations
- Open-source TAK-compatible servers
- Web interface capabilities
- COT (Cursor-on-Target) protocol support
- Geospatial mapping integration
- Mobile device support
-
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
-
Deployment Requirements
- Hardware needs: CPU, memory, storage
- Network requirements: ports, protocols, firewall rules
- Dependency requirements: databases, message brokers
- Scalability: single-node vs clustered deployments
-
Security Considerations
- Data encryption: in-transit and at-rest
- Authentication mechanisms
- Authorization models
- Audit logging capabilities
- Vulnerability history
-
Integration Capabilities
- REST API availability
- WebSocket support for real-time updates
- External authentication providers
- Custom plugin/system integration
Research Process
-
Discovery Phase
- Use DuckDuckGo to search for "open source TAK server"
- Identify 5-10 potential implementations
- Document source repositories and documentation
-
Evaluation Phase
- Review README files and documentation
- Check GitHub stars, activity, and maintenance status
- Evaluate feature completeness against requirements
-
Selection Phase
- Create comparison matrix of top 3 candidates
- Document pros and cons of each option
- Select optimal implementation based on criteria
Deliverables
-
Research Report (PLAN.md)
- Summary of findings
- Comparison of top 3 implementations
- Recommendation with justification
-
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