[nanomsg] Re: initial code repo for Go version of SP protocols
- From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2014 06:08:24 +0100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 24/03/14 04:57, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> It would be pretty straight forward to add UDP support. The issue
> will be defining what the wire format for UDP looks like. I have
> some thoughts here and if I had my druthers each SP message would
> translate to a single UDP datagram. Others might have different
> ideas.
Yes. I would say that UDP-mapping RFC should contain a single
sentence: "SP message maps directly to an UDP datagram."
That obviously entails that all messages exceeding path MTU will be
dropped silently.
As for a possibility of making a more complex transport on top of UDP,
the primary motive, IMO, would be to allow messages to exceed PMTU.
That in turn means adding identification of peers (either by using
connections or by using globally unique identifiers), sequence
numbering the packets, PMTU discovery, identifying message boundaries
withing packets etc. If anyone is interested in this, I'll be happy to
elaborate.
Martin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTL73IAAoJENTpVjxCNN9Y41YH/i75n89NkI1Sk2R4lzxaGKQf
X92lAWSaa9x0ie9qrt2FapKbpQDc58O4x48vR1rzszy/i0pedlmSgqk22jII/1cm
dxDTbBXH2d9aohEM1o/3llJ7ym8WcSf8cW0OvbRynz+ZrBsRtufYTA0bPh8joamh
0GMtbcvZE7u3zsoWUSUcKFCjWE7/uEsnIFXFOjBQAuqZ7fYJck3PYoK4/CSXCY52
A434RE2/9L6G524j8jk9Q7b1ik4oMu2CVHHNoauf2s95eOVXpL8Cyu7TqY9OP16z
YQ4bt9T7wJLgibn8fF2xxcFX0qE/ht1PfmlgSf2fTZ6T8OahUNVVykwrQSwwEA8=
=ak1/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Other related posts:
