[zeromq-dev] Does ZMQ handle tcp-RST?

artemv zmq artemv.zmq at gmail.com
Tue Dec 17 15:56:18 CET 2013


I'm sorry for make you (and any other in ZMQ commnty) think that I'm not
polite or disrespectfull.


Here's a code: http://pastebin.com/UGzHbXfG
On the Client  I set HWM=0 on DEALER socket.  Pls. run code with "-ea"  jvm
flag so assertions could make sense.
So, what's point I try to prove with this code?  Smply launch a Server,
then launch a Client.  Pls. take a look at console, you will see some
chatting. Then kill the Server and go to Client console -- you will not see
any "assertion failed"  exceptions which I expected at   "assert   send()".
 So what we have?   DEALER knows that ROUTER died (via tcp-RST)  but still
returns "true" for .send().




2013/12/17 Justin Cook <jhcook at gmail.com>

> Artem,
>
> Overall, you have been respectful and polite toward the community. We are
> all busy, and have jobs, kids, and other things to keep us busy. I asked
> you to provide your code which you initially dismissed. All it takes is one
> line or an easy off by one error to cause a complete misunderstanding.
>
> Pieter did not imply you said “I want”. That is simply a way of saying
> that your needs and use cases should be well defined along with providing
> that which is asked for, read the docs and even source code if necessary so
> you understand what the underlying semantics are of what you are dealing
> with.
>
> I applaud you for doing tcpdumps and examining what is going across the
> wire so you understand what happens in specific situations.
>
> Cheers,
>
> --
> Justin Cook
>
>
> On Tuesday, 17 December 2013 at 14:26, artemv zmq wrote:
>
> > > > Agreed, that's what he's saying. So where are the semantics of HWM=0
> > > > defined? "I want" has never been a valid problem statement in this
> > > > community.
> > >
> >
> >
> > Hi Pieter. I never in this thread said "I want".
> >
> >
> > 2013/12/17 Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com (mailto:ph at imatix.com)>
> > > Agreed, that's what he's saying. So where are the semantics of HWM=0
> > > defined? "I want" has never been a valid problem statement in this
> > > community.
> > >
> > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 2:49 PM, Justin Cook <jhcook at gmail.com(mailto:
> jhcook at gmail.com)> wrote:
> > > > Pieter,
> > > >
> > > > What he is trying to do is set HWM to 0 so it will block when a
> network disconnect occurs. So far, he is saying that is not happening. I
> asked him to provide a link to his code and specifically say what is
> happening and what are his expectations.
> > > >
> > > > He is basically saying that when a disconnect occurs and HWM is set
> to 0, send() still returns true. He doesn’t want that to occur.
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Justin Cook
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tuesday, 17 December 2013 at 13:44, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > HWM=0 does not mean there's no buffering. The TCP buffers will
> accept
> > > > > messages up to a certain size. If you try with larger messages
> send()
> > > > > may behave differently with HWM=0. Also, the queuing strategy
> depends
> > > > > on the socket type.
> > > > >
> > > > > Can you find a specification somewhere that states what should
> happen
> > > > > in this case, and can you make a test case that proves the
> software is
> > > > > not conforming to the specification? That is a bug. "I am trying
> edge
> > > > > cases and don't understand the results" isn't a bug.
> > > > >
> > > > > So read the specs (there are RFCs for socket behavior, and man
> pages)
> > > > > carefully and try to make minimal test cases to disprove the code.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > zeromq-dev mailing list
> > > > zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org (mailto:zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org)
> > > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > zeromq-dev mailing list
> > > zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org (mailto:zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org)
> > > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > zeromq-dev mailing list
> > zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org (mailto:zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org)
> > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20131217/403de500/attachment.htm>


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list