[elvin-discuss] Re: Elvin spec
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
>>>> 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
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