If you want to talk to web servers, you really should use an existing websocket proxy or bridge IMO.
On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Yannick Koehler <[email protected]> wrote: > Stepping back was my actual next step, before investing I needed to make > sure that the requirement that I have were met or would be met in a > relatively close future. I need a persistent (yet recoverable since > connection still could be dropped) TCP connection to a web server (re-using > existing port ala websocket) that offer message based bi-directional and > allow multiplexing subchannels that offers a messaging API on top of it, and > ideally a PUSH/PULL method supporting REST on top. > > If ZeroMQ can't offer that in the next year, it would be a waste of my time > to step back and use ZeroMQ as its currently offered, knowing that next year > I still won't have what I need. > > So right now, in order for me to progress on my project with ZeroMQ, I need > to understand if my needs can be somewhat met, by actual code or by > implementing it in the time frame that I have, so basically, I need to know > how "utopic" that would be. > > I totally understand that not having this requirement above, I could achieve > the same with multiple simultaneous and short lived connections and learn > the ZeroMQ way/API but that requirement so far is not something I can drop > that easily. > > > 2013/6/7 Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> >> >> On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:39 PM, Yannick Koehler <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > I have a need where for firewall penetration and simplicity to have a >> > single TCP connection between my clients and servers. My understanding >> > is >> > that ZMTP 3.0 is offering this. It is also my understanding that right >> > now >> > this is not yet stable or usable in a production environment, is this >> > assertion true? >> >> It's specified in ZMTP 3.0 but not implemented in libzmq yet. >> >> > I will download libzmq and try to find out on my own, but would really >> > appreciate some pointer as to the state of this kind of usage and best >> > practices... >> >> My advice is to step back from what you want to make, and instead >> spend a few days learning the 0MQ patterns and semantics by working >> through the Guide. When it "clicks" for you, go back to your problem >> and make a simple minimal design. Then develop that little by little. >> If you try to make the real architecture directly, it will usually not >> work due to the many wrong assumptions you have about how 0MQ works, >> and you'll be disappointed with 0MQ. >> >> -Pieter >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > > > -- > Yannick Koehler > Courriel: [email protected] > Blog: http://corbeillepensees.blogspot.com > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
