Hi Uze, Thank you for your note. I understand the issue better.
Others have commented on the approach. Let me explore something different with you. Since client rediscovering the server seems to be the problem, would it help to discuss how we can make this more efficient or reduce the impact? Maybe if we do a good job here then this need becomes less important. Ravi Subramaniam Principal Engineer Intel - (408) 765-3566 On Apr 18, 2016, at 7:27 PM, ??? <uzchoi at samsung.com<mailto:uzchoi at samsung.com>> wrote: Ravi. Let me explain the problem and requirement. Core issue is not associated with multiple port. When server reboot, client needs to discover thapt server again because port number is reassigned with different port due to random port assignment logic. Requirement is that let the server device hold the same port number when it reboots. As a solution, IoTivity can provide the api to set the port number to maintain the same port before. However there are two holes. One is complex implementation across multiple layers which are maintained by different development group. The other is that server application should handle lots of logic for port management. As alternative solution, it is suggested to define the specific port which IoTivity assigns by default. Multiple port is just consideration for multiple iotivity stacks in a single device. This could be either OCF or IoTivity issue. I wish you understand my requirement. BR Uze Choi ---?? ???--- ??? : Subramaniam, Ravi/ravi.subramaniam at intel.com<mailto:Ravi/ravi.subramaniam at intel.com> ???? : 2016/04/18 22:08 (GMT+09:00) ?? : Re: [cftg] RE: OCF IANA Port Number Assignment Hi Uze, I am not saying or suggesting that it is an Iotivity only issue. I am suggesting that if I understood the problem correctly then may be spec can help with other approaches. Ravi Subramaniam Principal Engineer Intel - (408) 765-3566 On Apr 18, 2016, at 12:12 AM, ???(Uze Choi) <uzchoi at samsung.com<mailto:uzchoi at samsung.com><mailto:uzchoi at samsung.com>> wrote: Hi Ravi, Ok, I got it, this could be IoTivity specific issue. During reboot the device. most of case, IP will be same in the local network. For the same port, there are two approaches. One, is to store the previously assigned port. The other is to use registered port. IoTivity have decided to use the registered port for several reasons. (second option) In this case I?m not sure to define the port name with ocf naming. BR, Uze Choi From: cftg at openconnectivity.org<mailto:cftg at openconnectivity.org><mailto:cftg at openconnectivity.org> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Subramaniam, Ravi Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 3:38 PM To: uzchoi at samsung.com<mailto:uzchoi at samsung.com><mailto:uzchoi at samsung.com>; 'Michael Koster'; 'Aja Murray'; iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org<mailto:iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org><mailto:iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org>; cftg at openconnectivity.org<mailto:cftg at openconnectivity.org><mailto:cftg at openconnectivity.org> Subject: RE: [cftg] RE: OCF IANA Port Number Assignment Hi Uze, I recognize that each stack for multiple instances may require an individual port (each instance does not always need to have individual port but let?s assume they do). I don?t understand why these need to be registered ports. Also what happens in a situation where there are more than the 5 instances (wouldn?t we have issues because we would have run out of reserved ports?)
