> I don't think we can make any decisions on CoAP until DTLS support is there. > It may influence what the CoAP API looks like.
Thiago, could you, please, clarify this? They model their Coap client after QNAM and related classes (like QNetworkRequest/Reply pair). As I understand it now - DTLS or not does not affect this API much - they can later add QSslConfiguration/sslErrors signal(s) in their API. Am I missing something? >From client side QDtlsConnection I'm working on is not very different from QSslSocket/QUdpSocket as we have them in Qt now (though it's none of them exactly). Best regards, Timur. ________________________________ From: Development <development-bounces+timur.pocheptsov=qt...@qt-project.org> on behalf of Thiago Macieira <thiago.macie...@intel.com> Sent: Monday, January 15, 2018 5:55:41 AM To: development@qt-project.org Subject: Re: [Development] QtCoap: QNAM-like API or not On Sunday, 14 January 2018 09:49:48 PST Adrien LERAVAT wrote: > Hi all, > > > Before feature freeze, we wanted to challenge the current API for the CoAP > module. I don't think we can make any decisions on CoAP until DTLS support is there. It may influence what the CoAP API looks like. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center _______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
_______________________________________________ Development mailing list Development@qt-project.org http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development