I'm scratching my head a bit to understand your scenario so I'll answer the
easy question first. ;-) The address format currently used by messenger
isn't part of any official spec, and the official spec will likely look a
bit different. When the spec is ratified, we will have to change and
probably do some work to maintain backwards compatibility.

Now as for your scenario, I applied your patch and ran through the scenario
you describe and what I observed was the first reply going from window 1 to
window 3 getting dropped due to the (intentionally) aborted connection, and
the second reply ending up going to window 2 because the window 1 messenger
saw that there was no connection and was able to initiate its own
connection based on the address in the reply_to. What is perhaps a little
odd about this configuration is the fact that the messenger in window 3 has
chosen a dns registered name that collides with the ip/port used in window
2. If you imagine instead that the messenger in window 3 is actually
subscribed to  amqp://~, then the behaviour could be quite
useful. The server could in fact get a reply back to the client even if the
client's original connection dies.

So assuming I understand your scenario/suggestion correctly, I'd say the
ability to choose a dns registered name for your messenger is actually a
feature, not a bug. I'll also point out that because the messenger name is
placed in the reply_to address with simple text substitution, you can
always choose your messenger name to be '/foo' instead of foo (or indeed
you could use any illegal domain character) in order to avoid the
possibility of accidental collision.

Does this help at all or do I have the wrong end of the stick regarding
your scenario?


On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 11:47 AM, Bozo Dragojevic <bo...@digiverse.si> wrote:

> On 3. 11. 13 17:41, Bozo Dragojevic wrote:
> [snip]
>  The attached patch 0002-... implements the former solution.
> I just noticed it's possible to say reply_to = "~/foo/bar". If the
> principle is sound I can supply the rest of needed changes.
> Bozzo

Reply via email to