0MQ: The Intelligent Transport Layer

[Roy Williams]

LIGO supports a open-source Jabber API called LVAlert:
https://www.lsc-group.phys.uwm.edu/daswg/projects/lvalert.html

The software is python, and can utilize any Jabber server. There is 
lvalert_send, lvalert_listen; then lvalert_admin for setting up nodes 
and subscribing etc. The same people (University of Wisconsin, 
Milwaukee) run a server at lvalert.phys.uwm.edu.

Roy

---
Caltech LIGO
roy at caltech.edu
626 395 3670



On 12/20/11 5:48 PM, Matthew Graham wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> Several projects are using Jabber in-house so there is whatever infrastructure they have. However, in terms of general user stuff, it pretty much is what we wrote for VOEventNet which should just need updating.
>
> 	Cheers,
>
> 	Matthew
>
>
> On Dec 20, 2011, at 5:14 PM, John Swinbank wrote:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Naive question: what existing Jabber infrastructure is there?
>>
>> As of now, there's nothing at<http://www.voevent.org/>  which refers to Jabber. Readers who want to "get started with… subscribing to streams" are directed to SkyAlert (which – correct me if I'm wrong – is all web based) or to DC3 Dakota (which only covers the simple TCP transport).
>>
>> Googling finds me<http://voeventnet.caltech.edu/software/index.html>, but I'm not sure how seriously to take that: my understanding was that VOEventNet is defunct. At any rate, I tried the Java client and didn't get much sense out of it (specifying "jabber.server=moriori.cacr.caltech.edu" as per the help causes it to return "Could not connect to null:5222.: (504)").
>>
>> Any other pointers appreciated.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John
>>
>> On 20 Dec 2011, at 23:51, Matthew Graham wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Agreed but considerations should include:
>>>
>>> - Is there conceptually anything wrong with the existing infrastructure?
>>> - Is it just a case that the current tools are not good enough and no-one has been bothered enough to dedicate some time to sorting this out?
>>> - What exactly are our use cases for event transport?
>>> 	
>>> 	Cheers,
>>>
>>> 	Matthew
>>>
>>> On Dec 20, 2011, at 3:46 PM, Alasdair Allan wrote:
>>>
>>>> XMPP/Jabber is pubsub, that's not necessarily the only architecture you want to think about for event transport.
>>>>
>>>> Al.
>>>> --
>>>> Sent from my iPad.
>>>>
>>>> On 20 Dec 2011, at 23:37, Matthew Graham<mjg at cacr.caltech.edu>  wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess my reaction is what's wrong with XMPP/Jabber that this solves?
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>
>>>>> Matthew
>>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 20, 2011, at 8:11 AM, Roy Williams wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> As we continue to wrestle with VOEvent transport, new (and simpler) protocols arrive. This looks promising ....
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.zeromq.org/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyone have any experience with this?
>>>>>> Roy
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> Caltech LIGO
>>>>>> roy at caltech.edu
>>>>>> 626 395 3670
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>