2006/1/19, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
I think so. We can implement this as a separate transport layer, or as an IoFilter. But what is the advantage over TCP here?
Yes, you can use a certain UDP port to communicate. You can specify local port number on the client site if you want to do.
Hi all,
I like to know your professional advice if the following project is
efficient realizable with the current version of mina:
I plan to implement a UDP-based protocol which offers features like flow
control, rate control, ARQ and so on. Therefore, every UDP packet contains a
small header which stores
1. Flags (1Byte) (e.g. END-Flag, ARQ-Flag, ...),
2. Message Id (2 Bytes),
3. Fragment nr. (2 Bytes).
So, with the help of the fragment number a message can be split into several
packets. On server side, the message must be refragmented. Therefore, a
received packet is delegated by it's extractable Virtual Connection Id,
IP:Port:MsgId, to the belonging Message Session, which is responsible for
refragmentation, ARQ, Timeout, etc. With regard to the performance a nearly
zero-copy-concept must be implemented.
Do you think this project is efficient realizable with the current mina
version?
I think so. We can implement this as a separate transport layer, or as an IoFilter. But what is the advantage over TCP here?
This protocol is intended for offering a reliable SOAP-Binding based on UDP.
So, a refragmented request message often leads to a response. For sake of
simplicity, each host receives and sends messages using always the same
local UDP port. Can this be achieved with mina? If yes, how?
Yes, you can use a certain UDP port to communicate. You can specify local port number on the client site if you want to do.
HTH,
Trustin
--
what we call human nature is actually human habit
--
http://gleamynode.net/
PGP Key ID: 0x854B996C
