Re: Connecting spread daemons with different segment configurations

Hi Yair,

thanks for the answer, but I think that your case does not meet my =

requirements if I understand your setup in the right way.
If there is just one daemon on 1. running, the spread clients on 2. and =

3. are able to talk to each other.
The other point why I want to use this multi daemon setup, is that the =

daemons on 2. and 3. can handle the breakaway of the connection in a =

wifi scenario with bad quality.
In your case the clients needs to handle faulty connections on their own.

Kind regards,
Timo


Timo Korthals, M.Sc.
Universit=E4t Bielefeld
AG Kognitronik & Sensorik
Exzellenzcluster Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
Inspiration 1 (Zehlendorfer Damm 199)
33619 Bielefeld - Germany

Office  : 3.037
Phone   : +49 521 106-67368
eMail   : [email protected]
Internet: http://www.ks.cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de/

On 29.01.2015 13:06, Yair Amir wrote:
> Dear Timo,
>
> To implement your scenario, what you want is to just have a single =

> Spread daemon in your
> configuration - just have server 1.
>
> The other two should just connect as clients. This seems exactly what =

> you want.
>
> Let me know if you think I misunderstood something.
>
> Best,
>
>     :) Yair.
>
> On 1/29/15 5:20 AM, Timo Korthals wrote:
>> Dear Spread users,
>>
>> we are using spread daemons for our distributed robot network.
>> We know already, that each device needs exact the same configuration =

>> regarding the segments, otherwise the spread daemons wont connect to =

>> each other.
>> But is there a way to not have the same segment configurations?
>> So lets assume the following scenario of three participants {1,2,3}.
>>
>> *1. is a server, which knows the participants 2 and 3*
>> /spreadOne.conf:/
>> Spread_Segment  192.168.0.255:4803 {
>>          one               192.168.0.1
>> }
>> Spread_Segment  192.168.0.255:4803 {
>>          two               192.168.0.2
>> }
>> Spread_Segment  192.168.0.255:4803 {
>>          three               192.168.0.3
>> }
>>
>> *2. and 3. are just clients, which are allowed to talk with the =

>> server, but not with each other*
>> /spreadTwo.conf:/
>> Spread_Segment  192.168.0.255:4803 {
>>          one               192.168.0.1
>> }
>> Spread_Segment  192.168.0.255:4803 {
>>          two               192.168.0.2
>> }
>>
>> /spreadThree.conf:/
>> Spread_Segment  192.168.0.255:4803 {
>>          one               192.168.0.1
>> }
>> Spread_Segment  192.168.0.255:4803 {
>>          three               192.168.0.3
>> }
>>
>>
>> Obviously this does not work with spread, am I right?
>> But if so, how can I make it work?
>> Is spread just comparing the hashes of the configs, and refusing =

>> connections, if hashes mismatch?
>> What happens if I remove the checks regarding the configuration check?
>> Has anyone done this before?
>>
>> Greetings,
>> Timo
>>
>> -- =

>>
>> Timo Korthals, M.Sc.
>> Universit=E4t Bielefeld
>> AG Kognitronik & Sensorik
>> Exzellenzcluster Cognitive Interaction Technology (CITEC)
>> Inspiration 1 (Zehlendorfer Damm 199)
>> 33619 Bielefeld - Germany
>>
>> Office  : 3.037
>> Phone   : +49 521 106-67368
>> eMail   :[email protected]
>> Internet:http://www.ks.cit-ec.uni-bielefeld.de/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Spread-users mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.spread.org/mailman/listinfo/spread-users
>>