Re: [zeromq-dev] ZMTP 3.0 "Resources". Implemented?

The use case is true (although I don't feel it personally so far). But if its implementation is too complicated in its current form maybe it could be done in another way. Like a kind of muxing-proxy socket that can connect to any kind of sockets on one side (on ipc or inproc most likely are they

Re: [zeromq-dev] ZMTP 3.0 "Resources". Implemented?

Actually, taking your idea, we can use a single (thread safe) server socket in a process that is shared by many threads. This kills the use case. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Axel Voitier wrote: > The use case is true (although I don't feel it personally so far). But

Re: [zeromq-dev] ZMTP 3.0 "Resources". Implemented?

My scenario was that I wanted to expose multiple services from a single port, which I think was the original intention of this. So I was imagining having a broker process binding , say, service1 to tcp://*:/service1 and service2 to tcp://*:/service2. The actual implementations of

[zeromq-dev] Access to underlying Linux socket?

[I'm sure this must have been asked before, but can't find anything] Is there a facility or method to "map" a 0MQ socket to its supporting Linux socket? Working with a Linux kernel that has some new networking facility together with socket extensions to control the facility. With vanilla sockets

[zeromq-dev] Multiplexing a TCP endpoint

I am investigating building a zeromq-based application which runs over TCP. It will run many separate services over zeromq, mostly REP/REQ (via proxies), but also PUB/SUB. The normal way to do this as far as I can tell is to use one TCP port per service. I want to avoid doing this, as the

Re: [zeromq-dev] Access to underlying Linux socket?

Mark, As a comment from the peanut gallery, it is generally a bad thing to leak that information up the protocol stack. Rather than getting that information back, it might be better to be able to attach user callout hooks at the places where you would want to make changes. That way there is

Re: [zeromq-dev] Access to underlying Linux socket?

You can't do this really, since one ZeroMQ socket can map to 0..n system sockets. There is a new option on libzmq master that lets you pre-configure a FD and give it to ZeroMQ to use for its first pipe. (ZMQ_USE_FD). A custom hook to configure new sockets is a nice idea. -Pieter On Wed, Feb

Re: [zeromq-dev] Multiplexing a TCP endpoint

This is what "resources" in ZMTP 3.1 were designed for. No implementation yet though (see other discussion on his list) :-) You would have to write the proxy loop yourself. So do a select on the external socket and all the internal sockets and know that when you pull a message from the

Re: [zeromq-dev] Multiplexing a TCP endpoint

Hi, In case you want to play even more, there is malamute broker. It can listen in tcp socket and you can filter incoming messages per stream or subject. The disadvantage is you must use mlm client API to make it work. However sounds like right tool for your use case. Dne 10. 2. 2016 8:12 PM

Re: [zeromq-dev] Access to underlying Linux socket?

On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 20:45 +0100, Pieter Hintjens wrote: > You can't do this really, since one ZeroMQ socket can map to 0..n > system sockets. > Had a feeling that was going to be the case. > There is a new option on libzmq master that lets you pre-configure a > FD and give it to ZeroMQ to use

Re: [zeromq-dev] Access to underlying Linux socket?

There is a test case (and a man page) on libzmq/master, search for ZMQ_USE_FD in zmq_setsockopt. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:38 PM, Mark Gillott wrote: > On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 20:45 +0100, Pieter Hintjens wrote: >> You can't do this really, since one ZeroMQ socket can map to

[zeromq-dev] Defaulting to tweetnacl?

Hi all, I'd like to start moving to tweetnacl as the default when building libzmq. This means, no separate install of libsodium, and encryption built in by default. We can still have a --with-libsodium and --without-curve at configure time. Does anyone have a problem with this? It will not

Re: [zeromq-dev] Multiplexing a TCP endpoint

Hi, Alex 10.02.16 19:23, Alex Bligh пишет: > I am investigating building a zeromq-based application which runs over TCP. > It will run many separate services over zeromq, mostly REP/REQ (via proxies), > but also PUB/SUB. > > The normal way to do this as far as I can tell is to use one TCP port

Re: [zeromq-dev] ZMTP 3.0 "Resources". Implemented?

There was something nice about writing the resource as a path, yet as no-one has implemented it, in any language, I'm probably going to remove it from the 3.1 RFC. On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 8:49 AM, Tom Quarendon wrote: > Yes, I see the issue now. > So when you bind it

Re: [zeromq-dev] Access to underlying Linux socket?

On Feb 10, 2016 20:39, "Mark Gillott" wrote: > > On Wed, 2016-02-10 at 20:45 +0100, Pieter Hintjens wrote: > > You can't do this really, since one ZeroMQ socket can map to 0..n > > system sockets. > > > > Had a feeling that was going to be the case. > > > There is a new

Re: [zeromq-dev] Defaulting to tweetnacl?

On Feb 10, 2016 22:41, "Pieter Hintjens" wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'd like to start moving to tweetnacl as the default when building > libzmq. This means, no separate install of libsodium, and encryption > built in by default. We can still have a --with-libsodium and >