Hi Guys,
Thanks for your responses. I definitely appreciate it. But maybe I said SOCKS
too early in the email :) The main idea was to make protocols pluggable (i.e.
introduce protocol "drivers") so the main code base wouldn't be burdened with
odd protocols that few people use anymore (like SOCKS), and 0mq wouldn't have
to be modified to support them. This looks pretty easy to do at link time, but
I would be more interested to do a run-time binding. I don't think there is a
generic dll/so framework that would make sense to use within 0mq, so I'm
thinking about introducing an api, something like (this is just pseudo code
because I'm not on the machine where I checked out the code, and I'm too lazy
to look up the specific details):
ECODE addProtocol(ZMQ_CONTEXT context, IProtocol Descriptor *pProtoDescr);
Where IProtocol would be an interface/struct with something like:
char* getProtocolId();
char* getProtocolDisplayName();
IConnectHandler connectHandler;
IDisconnectHandler disconnectHandler;
IReadHandler readHandler;
IWriteHandler writeHandler;
IErrorHandler errorHandler;
Then, wherever the current code uses if (protocol == "xxx') { do something; }
it would instead do something like:
IProtocolDescriptor protoDescr = context.protoRegistry.getProtocol(protocol);
If (protoDescr == null) {
Throw exception;
}
protoDescr.connectHandler.connect(); // or whatever it was about to do.
Of course the handler could be cached so the lookup wouldn't have to happen
every time (maybe even cached on the context).
With this, the user (programmer) would then just have to write a protocol
handler (e.g. SOCKS plugin) and call addProtocol after initializing 0mq and
he'd be off and running without having to modify the 0mq code base.
Thanks!
Lyle
From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Benjamin Cordes
Sent: Wednesday, February 12, 2014 12:08 AM
To: ZeroMQ development list
Subject: Re: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins
P.S. as I understand the tao of 0mq, the idea is to get rid of all these
idiosyncratic patterns. for example in the socks5 RFC you have this, see below.
the document was written in 1996. now its 2014, so it should be possible to do
this in better ways, unless you have to talk some other server which only
speaks that language (in that case you can write a mapper).
The values currently defined for METHOD are:
o X'00' NO AUTHENTICATION REQUIRED
o X'01' GSSAPI
o X'02' USERNAME/PASSWORD
o X'03' to X'7F' IANA ASSIGNED
o X'80' to X'FE' RESERVED FOR PRIVATE METHODS
o X'FF' NO ACCEPTABLE METHODS
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 9:01 AM, Benjamin Cordes
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
you can do this quite easily I believe with existing patterns. one auth server
takes in requests. that server checks the request and if it is valid forwards
the request to the outside world, sending back the response. here is the RFC
for socks5: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1928.txt I assume you only want to
connect to TCP/IP, not UPD?
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 3:05 AM, Lyle Thompson
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
I guess nobody is interested in pluggable protocols. Thanks anyway.
From:
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>]
On Behalf Of Lyle Thompson
Sent: Monday, February 10, 2014 3:11 PM
To: ZeroMQ development list
Subject: [zeromq-dev] Protocol Plugins
Hi ZeroMQ experts,
I am investigating how one might add SOCKS proxy support to 0mq, and of course
there are several options. But I was thinking that the most elegant would be to
add support for a "socks" protocol to 0mq. I took a look at the source code,
and I was a bit surprised to find that the protocols are not pluggable. At the
first level, I don't think this would be very hard to do (at least for *some*
of the protocols); Just add a registration mechanism and change the code that
is executed as the result of hard-coded protocol checks into calls through a
table of available plugins.
This would make it a bit easier to add new protocols (especially if they are
similar or running on top of existing ones, as is the case for SOCKS).
Presumably, one would just need to compile the module and link it into the code
via the make file.
Of course it would be nicer if it were dynamically linked (i.e. the "second
level"), but I don't know of a platform independent way to do this that would
make sense for 0mq. Of course it could be done with #ifdefs and what not, but
would it be worth it?
My motivation is that my company uses 0mq in a commercial product. And while we
don't mind contributing, we'd rather contribute a general improvement than a
very specific one (SOCKS), that many people would not need or want.
I know this is a very high-level idea at this point, so blast away and let's
see if there's anything left that worth implementing :)
Thanks,
Lyle
_______________________________________________
zeromq-dev mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
_______________________________________________
zeromq-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
