[rabbitmq-discuss] a common-lisp amqp client

Wed Feb 17 23:26:19 GMT 2010

James,

james anderson wrote:
> i had read the passages at the bottom of amqp0-9-1.pdf/page 35 to imply 
> that, if frames are strictly sequential, they would also continue to 
> exist. frames sent as 1,2,3 and arriving as 1,3 don't fall in my 
> classification of a strict order.

Indeed the frames do all arrive intact and in that order. But that is 
all happening within the context of a specific channel and in a specific 
direction, i.e. client-to-server or server-to-client.

> the next paragraph on that page implied that there might be an 
> alternative to using a zero-length frame to carry early termination 
> information, but i could not make out any command which could be sent 
> proactively to actually have the described effect without additional 
> disruption. what kind of termination was this passage intended to imply?

No idea, and note that the paragraph refers to *aborting* the sending of 
content, not terminating, so it wouldn't help in what you are trying to do.

> i had read the last paragraph of 3.1.1 on page 26 to limit, if not 
> preclude, the actions which you describe. yes, there is a possible 
> conflict between that paragraph and the passage at the close of 4.2.6.2 
> on page 36, but the "MUST NOT"s in the earlier passage are neither 
> lightweight nor contingent stipulations, and, as demonstrated, the 
> practice most certainly removes information.

The content bodies referred to in section 3.1.1. refer to logical AMQP 
method content, not any particular chunking of it into content frames.

Regards,

Matthias.