[zeromq-dev] Notes from a hackathon

Martin Sustrik sustrik at 250bpm.com
Fri Feb 6 11:37:30 CET 2015

On 2015-02-06 10:11, Joe McIlvain wrote:

> Integer routing ids sounds nice to me, quite honestly.

Just a small comment on this:

I've used fixed-sized integer IDs in nanomsg and, in retrospect, I think 
it was an error.

In particular, think of UDP or any other unconnected protocol as a 
transport. If you want to stay true to the nature of the protocol (and 
thus allow single socket to communicate with unrestricted number of 
Internet hosts), you can't accumulate state, i.e. any kind of 
pseudo-connections, at the endpoints. Therefore, there's nothing for the 
ID to point to. The only option seems to be to store the IP address 
inside of the routing record in the message. And while IPv4 address may 
fit into 32bit ID, IPv6 address certainly wouldn't.


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list