[Netty 5] Discussion - Remove SCTP Support
See original GitHub issueCurrently, Netty supports SCTP (transport-sctp). However, SCTP is kind of dead. The documentation of the transport-sctp
module is also not up to the mark. We should consider removing it from Netty 5 onwards.
So this is a discussion thread to find whether we should support it or not in Netty 5.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 2 years ago
- Comments:7 (6 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
SCTP multi-homing examples? - Google Groups
I am trying to get multi-homing working with it, using a simple test setup of three machines running the same code, the host/port...
Read more >User guide for 5.x - Netty.docs
For example, we often use an HTTP client library to retrieve information from a web server and to invoke a remote procedure call...
Read more >Netty data model, threading, and gotchas | by Ammar Khaku
For example, an application implementing STARTTLS may remove the ... used in TCP-based client-server contexts, and so the discussion below ...
Read more >netty-parent : 4.1.65.Final - Maven Central Repository Search
Netty. Netty is an asynchronous event-driven network application framework for rapid development of maintainable high performance protocol servers and ...
Read more >Accelerating netty-based applications through transparent ...
It also supports acceleration of intra-host communication via shared memory. It achieves low latencies and a high throughput by removing large ...
Read more >Top Related Medium Post
No results found
Top Related StackOverflow Question
No results found
Troubleshoot Live Code
Lightrun enables developers to add logs, metrics and snapshots to live code - no restarts or redeploys required.
Start FreeTop Related Reddit Thread
No results found
Top Related Hackernoon Post
No results found
Top Related Tweet
No results found
Top Related Dev.to Post
No results found
Top Related Hashnode Post
No results found
Top GitHub Comments
Yeah I would agree with both of you, we should not migrate deprecated protocols to netty 5. If and when we see interest we can help folks migrate by creating separate repos, reviewing PRs etc
I wonder if we could split it out into its own repo, and let it be maintained by whatever parties might be interested in it, if any. There are also a number of codecs that look questionable in the main repo, like redis, memcache, xml.