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
According to the handbook, it says that the federate's default port uses 15045 such as the RTI when there is no specified port.
However, I tested and saw the code that there is no default value for the federate, when the port is not specified.
If the port is not specified, the OS assigns it, and we get the assigned port using getsockname()
.
So, do we want default ports or not?
BTW, some port related issues, I see that #146 is not fixed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
You are right. The handbook needs to be updated. Federates should not have default ports (it wouldn't make sense anyway because they would all collide). There is another error on the same page, which says:
The port is ignored in centralized mode because all communication is routed through the RTI, but in decentralized mode it will specify the port on which a socket server listens for incoming connections from other federates.
This is not quite right. If there is a physical connection, then the communication is not routed through the RTI and the destination federate again acquires a port from the OS.
According to the handbook, it says that the federate's default port uses 15045 such as the RTI when there is no specified port.
However, I tested and saw the code that there is no default value for the federate, when the port is not specified.
If the port is not specified, the OS assigns it, and we get the assigned port using
getsockname()
.
So, do we want default ports or not?
BTW, some port related issues, I see that #146 is not fixed.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: