We use tcp. Why to switch to nanomsg? 1. I want to get advantage of "zero-copy", message oriented interface, Linux/Windows portability, inproc communication, ... 2. There are several services on M1 machine. They communicates together and can be converted to REQ/REP pattern or PUB/SUB. 3. Plan to add web services on M1 == REQ/REP, websocket == again PAIR? Most of communication is not stateless. Therefore, I guess, I need to know if peers/clients/servers are operational. Br Stevo -----Original Message----- From: nanomsg-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:nanomsg-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Martin Sustrik Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2014 1:59 PM To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: [nanomsg] Re: How nanomsg informs application about socket failure -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 08/04/14 13:49, BELLUS Stefan wrote: > Let's assume following scenario: > > < ---- SipCall with RTP ---> M1 <--- audio as PCM, data via nanomsg > ---> M2 > > M1 - machine 1 M2 - machine 2 > > SipCall has to be released when M2 is down SipCall has to be > released when M2 reports error (error can happen any time) M1 needs > to send data any time to M2 > > Because PCM audio is point to point, I guess the PAIR is enough > for me. That sounds like a perfrct match for TCP. Why use nanomsg at all? Martin -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTQ+SJAAoJENTpVjxCNN9YvWUH/2R9PyAGTevR4EeljGHZ66/I J9eqUyVYz+Xp8rq60Hoe0qRbEt1W0riD0K/XwrsiZRjwE6OhfqE9RvISodLTUU6V cALzjS+4KoaOdda0aYMmn8sc3vXVOqEOURyyLXwFfLMF9h0cHmxuuCrEuh/mXR4X aLV+FWT0/ZNj469UEHCGBmlADZA5H7sXUj08yOn9KTO05Hwb6g3fHngNCLcJhZiD iu4D8ZfKTUo1o6Tdaioj4Gu406yRqBrGn2BPWaTHsZ2UtmW+YT3ciM7auGP6TeB9 DUkbuLwg2Nk93j5rUu1hwpL1bpAvqWiuxPoK8EoNC/yNd8QuLEQDkWpkF477XDE= =1/3u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----