[erlang-questions] Idea for deprecating EPMD

[Vlad Dumitrescu]

Ok, can these other protocols handle the cookie authentication? I'm not
very familiar with them. And let's not forget that "old" nodes need to work
with this.

For the record, I'm not a fan of epmd either, but it might be tricky to
replace.

regards,
Vlad


On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau@REDACTED>
wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 11:36 AM Vlad Dumitrescu <vladdu55@REDACTED>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Geoff,
>>
>> How would you know which port where each erlang node listens on? With
>> epmd, the node publishes the port to the daemon and the peers need not know
>> it. It feels to me that a central registry is still needed, or each node
>> would have to run its own copy somehow. The latter might work relatively
>> easy for regular nodes, but we also have C and Java nodes...
>>
>> regards,
>> Vlad
>>
>>
> Exposing the rpc port could be done using any GOSSIP method, TCP/UDP
> multicast or broadcast, mdns, ...
>
> Imo making EPMD optional is a good idea. It would also allows to improve
> out-of-band messaging using tools like gen_rpc.
>
> - benoit
>
>
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 12:57 AM, Geoff Cant <nem@REDACTED> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all, I find EPMD to be a regular frustration when deploying and
>>> operating Erlang systems. EPMD is a separate service that needs to be
>>> running for Erlang distribution to work properly, and usually (in systems
>>> that don’t use distribution for their main function) it's not set up right,
>>> and you only notice in production because the only time you use for
>>> distribution is to get a remote shell (over localhost). (Maybe I’m just bad
>>> at doing this, but I do it a lot)
>>>
>>> Erlang node names already encode host information —
>>> ‘descriptive_name@REDACTED’. If we include the erlang distribution
>>> listen port too, that would remove the need for EPMD. For example:
>>> ‘descriptive_name@REDACTED:distribution_port’. Node names using this
>>> scheme would skip the EPMD step, otherwise erlang distribution would fall
>>> back to the current system.
>>>
>>>
>>> My questions for the list are:
>>> * Are you annoyed by epmd too?
>>> * Do you think this idea is worth me writing up into an EEP or writing a
>>> pull request?
>>> * Do you think this idea is unworkable for some reason I’m overlooking?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> -Geoff
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> erlang-questions mailing list
>>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> erlang-questions mailing list
>> erlang-questions@REDACTED
>> http://erlang.org/mailman/listinfo/erlang-questions
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/attachments/20151209/cdce7d04/attachment.htm>