On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:21 PM, John W Higgins wrote:
>> This is neat. It's something lots of people have discussed making but
>> no-one's actually done.
>
> Zed Shaw has a very nice implementation baked into the Mongrel2 web server
> (http://mongrel2.org/home).
Mongrel2 is excellent, and I did
Hi Martin,
Attached is a small patch for zmq_socket[3] that clarifies the scope
of ZMQ_PAIR sockets.
-Pieter
0001-Clarified-scope-of-ZMQ_PAIR-sockets.patch
Description: Binary data
___
zeromq-dev mailing list
zeromq-dev@lists.zeromq.org
http://lists.z
On 20 March 2011 09:09, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:21 PM, John W Higgins wrote:
>
> >> This is neat. It's something lots of people have discussed making but
> >> no-one's actually done.
> >
> > Zed Shaw has a very nice implementation baked into the Mongrel2 web
> server
>
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Marko Mikulicic
wrote:
> So the focus is on using HTTP as a transport protocol, between zeromq peers,
> not intended to be used as an interoperability solution, did I understand
> correctly?
Yes to the first part, but for me that precisely means
"interoperability
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
For what it's worth, there's a RESTful transport layer (RESTTL) I
designed at http://restms.org, which could be used as the basis for
this. The advantages of using REST is that everything will be properly
cached and proxied. The disadvantage
On March 20, 2011 04:09:41 am Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> Mongrel2 is excellent, and I didn't mean to ignore it... I think the
> question here is rather, "how do I extend my 0MQ network across the
> Internet" rather than "how do I build my web services using 0MQ"...
Its not production ready, but you
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Henry Baragar
wrote:
> Its not production ready, but you might consider a new secure (and
> potentially better performing) replacement for TCP call curveip
> (http://curvecp.org/) for running OMQ over the Internet.
It's certainly interesting, and I'm curious to s
On 20 March 2011 16:22, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 3:09 PM, Marko Mikulicic
> wrote:
>
> > So the focus is on using HTTP as a transport protocol, between zeromq
> peers,
> > not intended to be used as an interoperability solution, did I understand
> > correctly?
>
> Yes to
On March 20, 2011 12:11:29 pm Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:47 PM, Henry Baragar
>
> wrote:
> > Its not production ready, but you might consider a new secure (and
> > potentially better performing) replacement for TCP call curveip
> > (http://curvecp.org/) for running OMQ ove
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 5:43 PM, Marko Mikulicic
wrote:
> Sorry, I mean direct interoperability, as if the unmodified HTTP clients
> were able to connect to http/0mq endpoints. For example imagine a SUB
> endpoint listening on a http socket;
> a http client like a browser or wget or whatever then
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Henry Baragar
wrote:
> By adding to the list of transports defined in zmq_bind, etc:
> curvecp
> secure unicast transport using curvecp, see zmq_curvecp(7)
> Or is the string "curvecp" too long?-)
The string is fine IMO, I'm interested to see how you implement th
On March 20, 2011 03:40:57 pm Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 6:20 PM, Henry Baragar
>
> wrote:
> > By adding to the list of transports defined in zmq_bind, etc:
> > curvecp
> > secure unicast transport using curvecp, see zmq_curvecp(7)
> > Or is the string "curvecp" too long?-)
On Sunday 20, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
>
> For what it's worth, there's a RESTful transport layer (RESTTL) I
> designed at http://restms.org, which could be used as the basis for
> this. The advantages of using REST is that everything will b
13 matches
Mail list logo
