FAQ
Hi all,

Steven McCoy's IPv6 patches were merged into the master. The change
should be completely backward compatible. By default, IPv6 support is
switched off. To switch it on set ZMQ_IPV4ONLY option to false.

When you do so and if both peers support IPv6, the communication will
happen in IPv6.

If one of the peers doesn't support IPv6 the communication will
transparently fall back to IPv4.

Martin

Search Discussions

  • Pieter Hintjens at Aug 15, 2011 at 3:43 pm

    On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Martin Sustrik wrote:

    Steven McCoy's IPv6 patches were merged into the master. The change
    should be completely backward compatible. By default, IPv6 support is
    switched off. To switch it on set ZMQ_IPV4ONLY option to false.
    Is it plausible to backport this to 3.0?

    -Pieter
  • Martin Sustrik at Aug 15, 2011 at 4:50 pm

    On 08/15/2011 05:43 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:
    On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Martin Sustrikwrote:
    Steven McCoy's IPv6 patches were merged into the master. The change
    should be completely backward compatible. By default, IPv6 support is
    switched off. To switch it on set ZMQ_IPV4ONLY option to false.
    Is it plausible to backport this to 3.0?
    I wouldn't do so until it gets more or less stable. Getting it right is
    a bit tricky.

    Martin
  • Pieter Hintjens at Aug 15, 2011 at 8:11 pm
    OK, fair enough. When it's more or less stable, let's backport to 3.0
    so that more people get a chance to test it.

    -Pieter
    On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 6:50 PM, Martin Sustrik wrote:
    On 08/15/2011 05:43 PM, Pieter Hintjens wrote:

    On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 9:01 AM, Martin Sustrik<sustrik at 250bpm.com>
    ?wrote:
    Steven McCoy's IPv6 patches were merged into the master. The change
    should be completely backward compatible. By default, IPv6 support is
    switched off. To switch it on set ZMQ_IPV4ONLY option to false.
    Is it plausible to backport this to 3.0?
    I wouldn't do so until it gets more or less stable. Getting it right is a
    bit tricky.

    Martin
  • Steven McCoy at Aug 16, 2011 at 4:46 am

    On 16 August 2011 04:11, Pieter Hintjens wrote:

    OK, fair enough. When it's more or less stable, let's backport to 3.0
    so that more people get a chance to test it.
    So is zeromq/libzmq version 4? My patches were for zeromq/zeromq3.0 but
    Martin cleaned them up.

    --
    Steve-o
    -------------- next part --------------
    An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
    URL: http://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20110816/6526f2ba/attachment.htm
  • Pieter Hintjens at Aug 16, 2011 at 11:18 am

    On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Steven McCoy wrote:

    So is zeromq/libzmq version 4? ?My patches were for zeromq/zeromq3.0 but
    Martin cleaned them up.
    Yes, libzmq is 4.0 already. :-)

    I'm sure the patches will backport easily, I can probably do that once
    they are stable and I know which files changed.

    -Pieter

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
groupzeromq-dev @
categorieszeromq
postedAug 15, '11 at 7:01a
activeAug 16, '11 at 11:18a
posts6
users3
websitezeromq.org
irc#zeromq

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2017 Grokbase