vsomeip multiple routing managers can not work on one machine, but when deploying in different machines work well ?????

'network' Network identifier used to support multiple routing managers on one host. This setting changes the name of the shared memory segment in /dev/shm and the name of the unix domain sockets in /tmp/. Defaults to vsomeip meaning the shared memory will be named /dev/shm/vsomeip and the unix domain sockets will be named /tmp/vsomeip-$CLIENTID

as the user guide say, "network" config for supporting multiple routing managers on one host, now my problem is that when I enable and config multiple routing, other machine can find the service, but local client can not find the local service. so how the config the 'network' to solve this bug.

Apr 09 '22 10:04 journey175

both someip application will create /tmp/vsomeip-0 if they have been set as route， so the problem is that the client can find the service of server when they were deploy at one board , client initialize as route as well as server. and if the client and server are deploy at two boards , it works fine....

Apr 11 '22 09:04 journey175

Defaults to vsomeip meaning the shared memory will be named /dev/shm/vsomeip

Is this still the case? I haven't found shared memory usage in the code (v3.1.20.3). Plus it should stand out as it would have to be customized for AOSP.

In https://github.com/COVESA/vsomeip/issues/7 , there's the suggestion that it might be replaced. The change log mentions shared memory race conditions in v2, but I can't find anything definitively stating whether shared memory is still used in the code - except for in the docs for the network key.

Apr 29 '22 19:04 kheaactua

Defaults to vsomeip meaning the shared memory will be named /dev/shm/vsomeip

Is this still the case? I haven't found shared memory usage in the code (v3.1.20.3). Plus it should stand out as it would have to be customized for AOSP.

In #7 , there's the suggestion that it might be replaced. The change log mentions shared memory race conditions in v2, but I can't find anything definitively stating whether shared memory is still used in the code - except for in the docs for the network key.

Yes， the “network” key-value pair means the prefix of the unix domain socket file name in /tmp/vsomeip , and I haven't found shared memory usage in the code (v3.1.20.3) either.

when the commuication is established at the local board，the app proxy connect with the local route with unix domain socket, but if every app were configured as route by set the "routing":"SOMEIP_APPLICATION_NAME", how can they find the local service,
that`s the port I am conflused now. or this mode is not supported by the vsomeip, or just not supported until now and will be develop in the soon? thank you very much for your respond promptly!

May 05 '22 02:05 journey175

and I haven't found shared memory usage in the code (v3.1.20.3) either.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it was removed, but a phantom of it still exists in the documentation and CHANGELOG.

how can they find the local service

You should be able to run multiple routing managers using that network key/value pair. The effect is that instead of the default /tmp/vsomeip-0 (where /tmp is the base path), you'll see /tmp/<network name>-0.

So all the local apps start up with their designated VSOMEIP_CONFIGURATION, get the network name and connect to the routing manager at that socket.

May 05 '22 12:05 kheaactua

"You should be able to run multiple routing managers using that network key/value pair. The effect is that instead of the default /tmp/vsomeip-0 (where /tmp is the base path), you'll see /tmp/-0.

So all the local apps start up with their designated VSOMEIP_CONFIGURATION, get the network name and connect to the routing manager at that socket."

Yes， your opinion is right, but I think the vsomeip design mode is not support local service found when two application were deploy at their own routing managerd according to my expert`s phenomenon。

I have enabled multiple routing managerd.
I have configured different network with the two application both at one host machine.
the two app were connecting to their own routing manager

May 06 '22 03:05 journey175

@kheaactua