You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Preface: so long as the client is used with only a single target net ID, there should be no problem using the current implementation.
I had thought I wanted a context manager for the existing client to set a target net_id/port for a given block, but what I think may be missing is a "PLC" - a per-(target net id) with a configurable port. A client can communicate to any number of target net IDs (assuming the routing happens on the target end).
Todo
Need to look more into this one day:
On the protocol level, tracking of handles and such may be insufficient? (i.e., should it be keyed on (source_addr, handle)?)
Analogous to the caproto "VirtualCircuit", create a "PLC"/"Connection"/"Circuit" class to represent this layer
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It's entirely possible this should be taken a bit further, even - by (net_id, port). It wouldn't be difficult to extend to this with the codebase as-is, at least.
Background
Preface: so long as the client is used with only a single target net ID, there should be no problem using the current implementation.
I had thought I wanted a context manager for the existing client to set a target net_id/port for a given block, but what I think may be missing is a "PLC" - a per-(target net id) with a configurable port. A client can communicate to any number of target net IDs (assuming the routing happens on the target end).
Todo
Need to look more into this one day:
(source_addr, handle)
?)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: