ATS still have DNS feature，it is depond on UDP protocol.
ATS Project would be smaller than smaller less feature but HTTP If we
remove DNS & UDP.
ATS is named Traffic Server and it‘s architect designed to support
different protocol，UDP and TCP is basic protocol.
proxy/cache is a very narrow direction, ats project would be going to the
end if only has it.
a Good project : Nginx, 1st: it is a webserver, 2nd: it is a load balance,
3rd: it is a tcp proxy, 4th: it is a cache, and more and more feature added.
but ATS do less than less ...
Hope the IOCore to be a dedicated project to support TCP and UDP if the
core dev team prepare to remove the udp from ats and ATS still be a
proxy/cache system.
iocore project would be a nice project.
2015-11-03 23:09 GMT+08:00 Alan Carroll <
solidwallofc...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid>:
> As far as I know, ATS does not support UDP proxying which means all of the
> UDP support could be removed as well. There has been some talk of QUIC
> support but I suspect that would either be a separate handler (ala SPDY and
> HTTP/2) or folded in to NetHandler via the work being done for TS-3612.
>
>
> On Tuesday, November 3, 2015 12:20 AM, Chao Xu <xuc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> PollCont is a part of UDP implement, the PollCont is directly put into
> ET_UDP.
>
> UnixUDPNet.cc: thread->schedule_every(get_UDPPollCont(thread), -9);
>
> we will duplicate the polling code again on UDP implement if remove
> PollCont entirely.
>
> I think the Author of PollCont design it for UDPNetHandler and
> NetHandler: at the beginning of pollEvent(), the code "if
> (likely(net_handler)) {"
> for UDP implement, net_handler is set to NULLfor non-UDP implement,
> net_hander is set to non-NULL
> the PollCont is shared by UDP and non-UDP.
> there would be have duplicate code if we remove PollCont.
> thus, I'm disagree with you, I think PollCont should keep and nethandler
> should call pollEvent and remove dup code.
> Oknet Xu
> 2015-11-02 23:53 GMT+08:00 Alan Carroll
> <solidwallofc...@yahoo-inc.com.invalid>:
>
> I've been looking at that and my preference would be to remove PollCont
> entirely. As far as I can tell it exists only to hold the poll descriptor
> data which could easily be promoted to NetHandhandler.
>
>
>
> On Monday, November 2, 2015 8:14 AM, Chao Xu <xuc...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> Hi, All!
>
> I'm looking into the iocore source code reading now.
>
> I found the source code from PollCont::pollEvent() is a part of
> NetHandler::mainNetEvent()
> .
>
> And the PollCont is designed to as a abstract class for I/O polling
> operation.
>
> so I have a question: why we duplicate the code in mainNetEvent() rather
> than call pc->pollEvent(event, e) from NetHandler::mainNetEvent() ?
>
> Is it a special design ? or just for print "NetHandler::mainNetEvent" in
> debug log ?
>
> Thanks!
>
> Best Regard,
> Oknet Xu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
