Thanks everyone for pointing our my mistake here. But I then have a secondary question. Currently it is possible to crash a REP socket by not adhering to the REQ/REP protocol. Don't we want to make it more difficult to crash a REP server than this?
Cheers, Brian On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 3:47 AM, Martin Lucina <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Brian, > > [email protected] said: >> This was a big from earlier this summer that I am still seeing. I am >> observing an assert error in line rep.cpp:232 when connecting a REP >> socket to bound XREQ socket. > > As both Pieter and Ilja pointed out, you're not following the REQ/REP > "protocol", hence the assertion on the REP side. > >> I guess my first question is this: Is this combination of sockets >> supported? That is, should this work? > > As long as you follow the protocol required by the REP socket then yes, > this is supported and should work. > > -mato > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > -- Brian E. Granger, Ph.D. Assistant Professor of Physics Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo [email protected] [email protected] _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
