Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> That is what a transaction is, right. Nope. Many of my transactions have
> people in the middle of them making decisions or big compute loads. So in
> the HTTP world we end up with
> < C:Request, S:Ack, [C:Poll, S:Pending,] * C:Poll, S: Response>
> That is plain ugly. The pattern I really want is:
> < C:Request, S:Ack, S: Response>
> There is no need to poll, just respond when finished. That might be
> seconds, minutes, days or even years.
CoAP supports this.
> For telemetry, the pattern I want is
> < C:Config, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, S:Data, C:Config, S:Data,
> S:Data, ...>
> Again, this just doesn't fit onto the TCP or HTTP communication patterns
> and it is not really something QUIC is designed for. Sure we could make do.
> But I choose not to.
CoAP Observe does this.
CoAP works better without NAT because the NAT closes the subsequent S:Data in
many cases.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@xxxxxxxxxxxx> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
