search

atsign-foundation / at_protocol

The open source repository for the atProtocol specification and supporting documentation
https://docs.atsign.com
BSD 3-Clause "New" or "Revised" License
9 stars 7 forks source link

docs: Create 2023-11-rename-sshrv(d).md #112

Closed XavierChanth closed 11 months ago

XavierChanth commented 1 year ago

- What I did

- How I did it

- How to verify it

- Description for the changelog docs: Create 2023-11-rename-sshrv(d).md

gkc commented 1 year ago

@XavierChanth Another option might be to eliminate the tcp and/or socket bit entirely; e.g. use npnr and npnrd (no ports network rendezvous [daemon]). However my instincts are that it will be much cleaner for us to have separate binaries for tcp vs udp / etc in the future so I would lean towards something like tcpr/tcprd, or npsr/npsrd (no ports socket rendezvous)

XavierChanth commented 1 year ago

Update from our architecture discussion today is to vote on a new naming scheme:

For now I'll keep things simple, as we've thrown a number of names into the mix

  1. Keep the same name - sshrv(d)
  2. Something specifically tcp related - e.g. tcprv(d), tcpsr(d), etc...
  3. Something generic to sockets - e.g. srv(d), sr(d), etc...
XavierChanth commented 1 year ago

To vote for 1. thumbs up this comment

XavierChanth commented 1 year ago

To vote for 2. thumbs up this comment

XavierChanth commented 1 year ago

To vote for 3. thumbs up this comment

cpswan commented 1 year ago

@XavierChanth let's set a deadline for the vote to Fri 2359UTC once that's passed you can update the decision and we can review/approve

XavierChanth commented 1 year ago

Sounds good thanks

@XavierChanth let's set a deadline for the vote to Fri 2359UTC once that's passed you can update the decision and we can review/approve

XavierChanth commented 11 months ago

@cconstab @gkc @cpswan - I kept this open an extra week, seems like generic to sockets is the agreed upon naming scheme. I am inclined to either go with srv(d) or sr(d)... but srv is already used by DNS, and SR is the marketing name for the Socket Rendezvous. So I am inclined to go with sr(d).

But, we also have shrd which is split-horizon-root-daemon... awfully close to srd...

naming things is fun.

gkc commented 11 months ago

@cconstab @gkc @cpswan - I kept this open an extra week, seems like generic to sockets is the agreed upon naming scheme. I am inclined to either go with srv(d) or sr(d)... but srv is already used by DNS, and SR is the marketing name for the Socket Rendezvous. So I am inclined to go with sr(d).

But, we also have shrd which is split-horizon-root-daemon... awfully close to srd...

naming things is fun.

We should rename shrd

I like sr(d)

XavierChanth commented 11 months ago

Updated the DL with information based on these votes.