Osiris, following what t is missing in my opinion: * more socket types - that should be simple * inproc support - can be implemented with Monitor signaling instead of socket * polling on multiple socket - I think it is not possible with the current design I went with, need to revisited this * release to nuget * more people using it and report bugs
we can start with more socket types and release to nuget. It implements ZMTPv2 (https://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:15/ZMTP). On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 5:09 PM, Osiris Pedroso <[email protected]> wrote: > Under the subtitle "The Socket-Type Property" in the protocol > <https://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:23/ZMTP/>shows that all your needs would be > covered in the ZMTP implementation. > > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 9:01 AM brunobodin . <[email protected]> wrote: > >> For my project, I need REQ, PUB, SUB, (all connected, no bind), but also >> polling (in a LVC pattern), and PAIR for thread communication... I do not >> have a clear view but it seems it exceed ZMTP ? >> where does signalling interfere with this ? polling ? (I already have the >> REQ working in a native zmq compiled over uwp) >> >> Bruno >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:49 PM, Osiris Pedroso <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Doron, >> >> What is needed next on it? >> I see that there is a Dealer type socket only implemented. Implement >> other socket types? >> >> What would actually be the ultimate goal/API surface for a ZMTP >> compatible library for UWP in C#? >> >> Is it implementing the ZMTP protocol >> <https://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:23/ZMTP/> in .NET? >> >> Osiris >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 7:31 AM Doron Somech <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> UWP is problematic, you just cannot run zeromq or netmq on it. >> >> I started working on zmtp compatible library for UWP (in C#), you can >> find it here: >> >> https://github.com/somdoron/ZMTP.NET >> >> There is a lot of demand lately for zmtp/zeromq/netmq compatible library >> for UWP. >> >> Someone just need to lead the project, ZMTP.NET is good beginning, which >> I actually think will work on your case (can you use C# in your project?), >> but it is not a complete library yet and in need of a maintainer. >> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 3:18 PM, brunobodin . <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Doron, >> >> thanks for the heads up. The point I do not understand then is how I >> could run a test on uwp platform, using a connected REQ socket on uwp side >> and a bound REP on a server side ? >> >> Thanks >> >> Bruno >> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 11:08 AM, Doron Somech <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Zeromq internally use socket (for signaling) and binds it (at least on >> windows). Zyre also requires bind, as you already figure out. >> Bottom line I don't think you can use zyre or zeromq on UWP, or at least >> until bind is supported on UWP. >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 10:59 AM, brunobodin . <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I would like to leverage zyre in my application, but some nodes of the >> application will have to run on uwp platform :-( (not my choice) >> >> From my first tests I am able to build and run zmq, and czmq on uwp >> plaform, using slighly modified >> dll, see https://github.com/bbdb68/czmq/tree/uwp and >> https://github.com/bbdb68/libzmq/tree/uwp, >> but it seems (even if winsock is said to run on uwp platform...) that I >> cannot bind sockets. >> Zyre builds nicely on uwp. >> >> For now this is not an issue in my design, since only the client nodes >> are supposed to run on the uwp node. >> >> Regarding zyre, I made some experimentation and : >> * discovery step can work thanks to the gossip mode. UDP mode fails >> * but communication fails, most probably because the node's router socket >> cannot bind. >> >> So my question is : do you think it is possible to design a "limited" >> zyre node that could run on such a platform, without performing any bind, >> while connecting to an existing network of zyre nodes ? >> >> I suppose this would require some kind of proxy node that would be bound >> and used as a intermediate between the "limited" nodes and the regular >> node, at least for socket setup. >> >> Any ideas ? >> >> Regards >> >> Bruno >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> zeromq-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > zeromq-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev >
_______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
