On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Martin Pales <[email protected]> wrote: > > > There are separate control frames and data frames. Control frames contain > > version and type. > > I guess it's nicer in some ways than a separate version header. How > about versioning data frames? IMHO, versioning data frames is not really needed. Every connection starts with a greeting and it should be sufficient to check the version on connection setup. > Well, multiplexing seems like a good idea but in practice... we've not > had great experience with it. I'd probably use it only for bridging. Yup. I am aware of the disadvantages. Yet for some use cases it's applicable. Anyway, this is just a suggestion with no real priority. The focus should be in those areas where zeromq really shines. Multiplexing can be achieved by having either SCTP or SPDY transport. Martin
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
