[zeromq-dev] Router socket expected behavior
sustrik at 250bpm.com
Sun Jan 8 23:20:05 CET 2012
On 08/01/12 21:17, Benoit Laplante wrote:
> This simple piece of code attached was working fine in 3.0 but in 3.1
> blocks at line 55.
> The program send locally "echo" from client to worker using this
> topology: DEALER[client]->ROUTER[frontend]->ROUTER[backend]->DEALER[worker]
> In 3.1, it seems the worker socket MUST register by sending some data
> first to the backend before the client can route "echo" to worker.
> In 3.0, it was not necessary. A simple connect to backend was sufficient.
> Is the 3.1 behaviour the expected behaviour?
No. It is not expected behaviour. Can you please fill in a bug in the
More information about the zeromq-dev