[nanomsg] Re: Status
- From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Garrett D'Amore <garrett@xxxxxxxxxx>, nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 22:55:34 +0100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 04/03/14 22:47, Martin Sustrik wrote:
>> The other thing is *interface* stability, where interfaces are
>> not just API/ABI, but also *protocol* level details. The
>> protocol asserts version 0 (despite the RFC indicating version
>> 1).
>
> I'll have a look at that later on.
You've probably meant this line in the RFC: "sp-tcp-mapping-01" 01
there is an IETF "Internet Draft" version number, not the version of
the protocol.
Actaully, it looks like that the RFC doesn't specify what the version
number is. It should be adjusted to say that it is zero.
Martin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTFkvWAAoJENTpVjxCNN9Y9q4H/3lRjGZqMcjIYjmOm4Y5/L9i
4WM+HstwmHxcPU12ufpa2ARPwUhWHOFGFfIgl9vKhswwWXp5zhebHLOd+Rtu2TAg
zH0/yz8loFeaOlzFkK4cfTJ/vQCx00qPnML3S7ZmTsFCz8aapiW14rJ91G9jirmh
xLna0+ngGiSFdMPMqPiHWy8xZhupZfV1Hs/qS3OBait0YJ+QjMVQDoL9icUAeKj+
p+G+zQJ2p4BJSK2zADBd7MZG/uzEoScJvwVDLSNLhA9wD23Jbub/+5Wt3VK4kspK
CT5ugc/GDROLJLLvD3rqzI3O7hlhTY+KU1z3d1Kf1tHij7doKVzVWSeNUnaky2s=
=S6fz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Other related posts:
