On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 1:47 PM, Chris Laws <[email protected]> wrote:
> I did not initially realize that there were 20/ZRE and 36/ZRE versions. Sorry about that. There's a small note in the header of RFC 20, I'll add a more explicit note in the first paragraph. > When running C, Go and Python chat examples, my Pyre node would crash upon > receipt of 17 byte length identities (a v2 feature). Apart from checking the > sender identity length in the HELLO is there any way to detect that a peer > is v1 or v2? Rookie mistake on my behalf. I've a protocol signature but no versioning. The version number has to go into every message. I'll add that into V2 and update the C code.... ... ok, done, pull requests pending. > The czmq and Go based ZRE libs define a version (e.g. zyre's ZRE_MSG_VERSION > in zre_msg.h) but do not seem to use it anywhere. Removed that constant, it was useless. > The ZRE beacons have a version, v1, but this does not actually inform the > receiver of the peers TCP version which may be v2. ZRE seems to be a > combination of the UDP and TCP protocols so should this in fact report v2 > for ZRE implementations using v2 of the protocol (36/ZRE)? Right, the beacon version is independent. > Establishing a simple interoperability test (such as the simple chat > example) would be a great way to ensure each implementation's protocol > compliance and serve as a useful tool for testing and refining the protocol > specification. Nice idea... -Pieter _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
