FastDDS and OpenDDS interoperability issue

[husnaini798]

Is there an already existing issue for this?

• I have searched the existing issues

Expected behavior

Note: Security feature disabled

FastDDS	OpenDDS	Results
Publisher	Subscriber	works fine
Subscriber	Publisher	should work fine but doesn't

Current behavior

Note: Security feature disabled

FastDDS	OpenDDS	Results
Publisher	Subscriber	works fine
Subscriber	Publisher	Subscriber does get the call to 'on_subscription_matched' callback, when Publisher starts publishing. But subscriber never gets the call to 'on_data_available' callback

Steps to reproduce

FastDDS's SecureHelloWorldExample extended and with security code commented out. Also set the default QOS for participant, topic, reader and writer

For OpenDDS, used the following code for testing the OpenDDS code:
https://github.com/omg-dds/dds-security
Also commented out the security code in here. And set the default QOS for participant, topic, reader and writer

The two zipped helloWorld code folders (for OpenDDS and FastDDS) are only 80Kb, Please let me know how to share those.

Thanks

Fast DDS version/commit

version 2.8.1

Platform/Architecture

Ubuntu Focal 20.04 amd64

Transport layer

Default configuration, UDPv4 & SHM

Additional context

IDL used on both OpenDDS and FastDDS
module Messenger { struct HelloWorld { unsigned long index; string message; }; };

XML configuration file

No response

Relevant log output

No response

Network traffic capture

No response

[husnaini798]

github URL for the two zip files containing the OpenDDS and FastDDS code

[JLBuenoLopez]

Hi @husnaini798,

Have you tested against other DDS implementations? Fast DDS release testing checks interoperability with several vendors. We are aware about the issue you are reporting but we have also reproduced the same issue with at least one other vendor so we assume that the interoperability issue might be at OpenDDS side.

[husnaini798]

Hi Jose, Thanks for confirming our findings. Not yet. I was thinking of trying Cyclone DDS next, with both FastDDS and OpenDDS. Would you be able to inform me which other vendor had the same issue? Thanks

…

On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 11:03 PM José Luis Bueno López < ***@***.***> wrote: Hi @husnaini798 <https://github.com/husnaini798>, Have you tested against other DDS implementations? Fast DDS release testing checks interoperability with several vendors. We are aware about the issue you are reporting but we have also reproduced the same issue with at least one other vendor so we assume that the interoperability issue might be at OpenDDS side. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3150 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AU4QRYF64RVZKNQKGPYPANTWNMCIDANCNFSM6AAAAAAS7NHCPA> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[Mario-DL]

According to the CONTRIBUTING.md I am moving this to the proper discussion forum.

[andreclerigo]

Hello @husnaini798, could you share more information on your findings?

[EduPonz]

Hi everyone,

Since Fast DDS v2.13.0 it is possible to configure the DataRepresentationQosPolicy for both DataReaders and DataWriters. Setting the ID to XCDR2_DATA_REPRESENTATION in your DataWriters would make Fast DDS and OpenDDS to interoperate. You can verify this by using Fast DDS Shapes Demo and Open DDS's iShape.

[kshang]

@husnaini798 你用的FastDDS和Cyclonedds分别是什么版本啊？我使用了security功能后，FastDDS和Cyclonedds无法通信了。

[vidalperezbohoyo]

Same issue in 2024. Only working in one direction. I think that data representation is not the problem. Using FastDDS 2.14 and OpenDDS 3.30. Same Qos and XCDR2. In FastDDS data reader in this version, qos didn't have representation member so i put XCDR2 in topic. The FastDDS 3.1.0 version has representation in DataReaderQos. But i forced to use 2.14. I don't known the difference between DataReaderQos and ReaderQos. I give DataReaderQos (without representation field in 2.14) to data reader constructor.
The only callback is called is on subscription matched. OpenDDS with OpenDDS working fine with this idl and data. And FastDDS with FastDDS same.

[JonathanDev22]

I have the same problem, I only have communication in one direction and I need to process this data, have you found the solution?

[cferreiragonz]

Hello @vidalperezbohoyo and @JonathanDev22.

If you take a look at the test report of the OMG-DDS (it can be found here) there should be no problem between Fast DDS and Open DDS interoperability. Also, we internally tested that Fast DDS 2.14 is able to communicate with Open DDS 3.30 using ShapesDemo and the equivalent version of Open DDS. Everything worked fine.

Could you test if the same issue occurs with basic types such as the ones used by ShapesDemo?