On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 11:19 PM, Merijn Verstraaten <[email protected]> wrote:
> RFC23 states that a backward compatibility detecting handshake starts as > follows: > "Send a 10-octet pseudo-signature consisting of "%xFF size %x7F" where 'size' > is the number of octets in the sender's identity (0 or greater) plus 1. The > size SHALL be 8 octets in network byte order and occupies the padding field." > > However, RFC13 states that ZMTP1.0 long length messages follow the format > "%xFF size flags", where bit 0 of flags specifies whether there are more > messages to come, which is wrong for an identity frame. Do existing ZMTP1.0 > implementations simply ignore this flag on identity frames? Good catch. For sure ZMTP 1.0 implementations don't check this, but I'm wondering why we chose %x7F. That might be a mistake, based on the explanation of the flags field in RFC 13 (bit 0 is put before bits 1-7). I suspect the intention was to create a valid frame, with the reserved bits all set to 1. So, %xFE. -Pieter _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
