It looks like we have consensus to move forward with this proposal. Thanks
all for your comments! I've moved it into "In Development"
Thanks,
-Dan
On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 4:47 PM Aaron Lindsey
wrote:
> This proposal sounds good to me. +1 to using standard security
> implementation based on TLS
>
This proposal sounds good to me. +1 to using standard security implementation
based on TLS
> On Apr 1, 2020, at 3:20 PM, Dan Smith wrote:
>
>> When we move from a reliable UDP implementation to one based on TCP, we
>> need to think about how to provide reliability on top of TCP. If you dig
>>
> When we move from a reliable UDP implementation to one based on TCP, we
> need to think about how to provide reliability on top of TCP. If you dig
> into TCP, you’ll find that it tries really hard (sometimes up to 15
> minutes!!) but doesn’t guarantee message delivery. Does this matter in
> pra
Echo’ing my comment here:
When we move from a reliable UDP implementation to one based on TCP, we need to
think about how to provide reliability on top of TCP. If you dig into TCP,
you’ll find that it tries really hard (sometimes up to 15 minutes!!) but
doesn’t guarantee message delivery. Doe
Can we document the protocol this time?
Thanks,
Mark
> On Mar 31, 2020, at 10:17 AM, Dan Smith wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> We created a RFC for replacing our UDP messaging in Geode with a TCP based
> solution. This will address the issues we have supporting our current udp
> encryption solution, a
Hi all,
We created a RFC for replacing our UDP messaging in Geode with a TCP based
solution. This will address the issues we have supporting our current udp
encryption solution, along with helping us move away from jgroups, which
currently can't be upgraded.
Please review and comment by 4/7/2020
