This is not necessarily a problem, if we retroactively define ZMTP1.0 to ignore the more flag on identity frames, which the current C++ implementation already seems to be doing.
Cheers, Merijn On Aug 12, 2013, at 01:45 , KIU Shueng Chuan wrote: > According to the "Backwards Interoperability" sections of RFC15 and RFC23, > bit 0 of the flags field is used to probe whether the peer is using ZMTP/1.0. > So now it needs to be left as %x7F. > > > > On Mon, Aug 12, 2013 at 7:13 AM, Pieter Hintjens <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
