On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 1:31 AM, Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 8:41 AM, Martin Sustrik <[email protected]> wrote: > >> One problem I can see is that you can enable/disable encryption on >> per-message basis, which presumably means you have encryption bit stored >> somewhere in the message body. That in turn means pyzmq has its own wire >> protocol and is not able to transparently interoperate with other >> language bindings. Am I wrong? > > The normal solution to that is documentation, i.e. specifying the 0MQ > wire level protocol properly to include this. There's no hurry, it's > good to experiment and when we know the best approach, refactor that > in a way that works for everyone.
I think Min has answered this below. Summary - we do not introduce a new transport format. Brian > - > Pieter Hintjens > iMatix - www.imatix.com > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > -- Brian E. Granger, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Physics Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo [email protected] [email protected] _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
