[elvin-discuss] Re: Elvin spec

David Arnold davida at pobox.com
Wed Jan 10 17:54:30 CST 2007

-->"Matt" == Matthew Phillips <matt at mattp.name> writes:

  Matt> On 08/01/2007, at 4:31 PM, Ian Lister wrote:
  >> On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Matthew Phillips wrote:
  >>> On 05/01/2007, at 4:24 PM, Ian Lister wrote:
  >>>> On Wed, 3 Jan 2007, David Arnold wrote:
  >>>>> most important is the NACK code, i think.  there's not much
  >>>>> alternative for a client library than passing back a
  >>>>> NOT_SUPPORTED to the application, but given it's allowable to
  >>>>> have routers without quench, etc, it's gotta be reported
  >>>>> somehow.
  >>>> NO_ROUTER_SUPPORT, of course. If you got a NOT_SUPPORTED
  >>>> (implying the lack of support is local) you'd just give up and go
  >>>> home, but with NO_ROUTER_SUPPORT it's worth continuing to try
  >>>> other routers.
  >>> Not sure what the difference is? Either a request is recognised
  >>> but not supported or it's a protocol violation surely?
  >> If the lack of support is local (e.g. your client library
  >> implementation doesn't support quench) there's no request at all.

  Matt> OK. But I would have thought the client library would have
  Matt> better ways of reporting (fixed) lack of support for a feature.

some client libraries (ie. Mantara's libelvin) distinguish between
things not supported by the client library (elvin_error_t code
NOT_SUPPORTED) and things not supported by the currently connected

since in the latter case you can connect to a different router to try to
get the functionality, it's a distinction that can be valuable.

  >> Yes, Bonjour consists of IPv4LL (addressing), mDNS (naming) and
  >> DNS- SD (discovery). ERDP is the existing Elvin Router Discovery
  >> Protocol.

  Matt> Sounds like what I want then ;) Is ERDP something that
  Matt> should/would be opened up?

what would you like first: discovery or federation?  (just so i know
where to focus my copious spare time :-)


More information about the elvin-discuss mailing list