Esko Dijk <esko.d...@iotconsultancy.nl> wrote:
--> For completeness the server should also respond with the BRSKI root
resource, which matches the filter. So:
> RES: 2.05 Content
> <coaps+jpy://[2001:db8:0:abcd::52]:7634>;rt=brski.rjp,
> <coaps://[2001:db8:0:abcd::52]/.well-known/brski>;rt=brski,
okay.
> The motivation why to do this particular query is not so clear in the
> document. I assume the following was intended:
> 1. JP wanting to find out if stateful JP is supported in this network:
> it can send this (without the asterisk)
> REQ: GET /.well-known/core?rt=brski
> 2. JP wanting to find out if stateless JP is supported:
> REQ: GET /.well-known/core?rt=brski.rjp
> 3. JP wanting to find out both in a single query:
> REQ: GET /.well-known/core?rt=brski*
Yes, sounds reasonable.
> In case 1 and 3 the JP may be looking for "rt=brski" in the
> response. Hence, in our example the rt=brski resource must be
> present. Otherwise, no interoperability.
> Note that the JP won't care about the details of the /rv, /vs, /es
> resources. It just needs Registrar address and port.
Agreed.
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [
] m...@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
