[nanomsg] Re: understanding of BUS protocol
- From: Garrett D'Amore <garrett@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: "nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx" <nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 01:49:11 -0700
Btw. I pushed my implementation of bus along with a test suite for it to my
repo. Feel free to have a look. (Easier if you grok go. But at least go is in
the c family.)
Sent from my iPhone
> On Apr 10, 2014, at 1:17 AM, Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/04/14 10:05, Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>
>>> I understand that is why you were using the pipe in the header.
>>> My implementation achieves the same thing, by moving this
>>> “device” functionality into the protocol itself. In other words,
>>> anytime someone in the bus gets a message, he sends it to
>>> everyone *except* the pipe he got it from. I do this
>>> immediately, without needing to push it up to the application
>>> (the device in this case) to do the forwarding.
>>
>>> What this means is that each “bus” acts as a local star (usually
>>> — although I guess you could have a client dial multiple
>>> different servers and have it act as a point.) I am assuming
>>> that we are not a fully mesh connected network, but more like a
>>> star.
>
> Unfortunately, the local network is often not a star but rather a mesh.
>
> There are two use cases for that:
>
> 1. Multicast protocols, i.e. there's no central server, packets are
> forwarded to individual boxes on the LAN by the network itself.
>
> 2. Eliminating the SPoF created by the device by connecting individual
> applications directly (everyone-to-everyone) instead of via a device.
>
>
>>> We can connect multiple stars together with devices. But if
>>> there is a loop in the network, it will not be possible to
>>> prevent message duplication/amplification with just the sender
>>> ID. You’d really need to introduce a TTL, along the lines of IP
>>> networking. I don’t think we want to get into that.
>>> Applications should just take care not to create loops.
>
> I was thinking about TTL and loop detection, but I was not sure it's
> appropriate or even needed. So I let it be in the end.
>
> Martin
>
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTRlOwAAoJENTpVjxCNN9Y/lMIAKyWPdO64r0lemoS6IEGl3C1
> 0mBzCgfdJg7pdpWtl6z78FR5/b1DT/h7rRBMo/NoEijWP2IqH4DmOglqQlKfUQZX
> 9YrPLuGTss2qKNdv/dy5mUdWQFJoAdPZFxV2UVV6NguXOVkMEyMFux11PtxN1bB2
> LIoLAWgmBjbBz53u9GT0LByuDmbIkcsvbiqG3hgfQBbE+0EzQgMCuHHpGrPvFc//
> jKLgseTdTIXO8X4qk8VTeiOSpH3UaCMvgDui8mw1/WK9PMgPLKbUZOQrqYDwAa2E
> 1CfXGzSlec6aycnD/N4x+ZPahKsEX3h43J0Mu+A4JK45wuoiN4Y2A0FPWALKnQo=
> =WyMd
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
Other related posts:
