Hi Thiago, BT on RFComm and BLE-GATT have been implemented on the IoTivity with the concept of connectivity extension which planned to align to OIC spec. 6lo-over-BTLE can resolve the problem by giving us IPv6. But we need to wait more than 5 year I expect for common use.
Not only for BT/BLE but also for IP, multiple application handling requirement exists from the smart device perspective. Performance point of view, single daemon process handling ioTivity common logic will help the loading time and memory consumption which are hot topic on smart device such as mobile. I believe this is the time to start this kind of discussion. BR, Uze Choi -----Original Message----- From: Thiago Macieira [mailto:thiago.macie...@intel.com] Sent: Thursday, February 04, 2016 4:16 PM To: ???(Uze Choi) Cc: hj210.choi at samsung.com; iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org Subject: Re: [dev] Proposal: Support multiple applications on a single smartdevice regardless of connectivity type On quinta-feira, 4 de fevereiro de 2016 11:50:47 PST ???(Uze Choi) wrote: > Hyungjun, > Let me classify your use case for each connectivity. > IP connectivity (Wi-Fi/Eth) : multiple iotivity instance can exist > work with different port. BT connectivity : multiple iotivity instance > will make a collision together due to same UUID on RFComm. The > multiple OIC BT application requires single iotivity instance which > can aggregate the BT communication. For this requirement, daemon > process model which was out-of-proc model defined before, is only > solution I think. BR, Uze Choi Ah, indeed, for a different type of transport like BT, we'll have problems. Do we need BT? No, seriously, is it required? Can we not require a socket interface, like IPv4 and IPv6? Remember that BT-GATT is not specified in OIC, it's purely an IoTivity extension. And remember that the Bluetooth SIG is working on 6lo-over-BTLE, which solves the problem by giving us IPv6. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
