On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Kis, Zoltan <zoltan.kis at intel.com> wrote:
> Hello, > > It seems the OCF Core spec 1.1 does not deal with presence any more: the " > oic.wk.ad" resource type and the "/oic/ad" resource are not specified any > more - or then it's just me who doesn't find them. > I couldn't find them either. > > iotivity still seems to support "enablePresence()" and "disablePresence()" > that are based on the "/oic/ad" resource. That sounds obsolete now. > > I wonder what are the current mechanisms in OCF that support the following > use cases: > - when a server deletes/unregisters a resource, observers of that resource > SHOULD get delete notifications > - [sub-case] when a client deletes a remote resource, observers of that > resource SHOULD get delete notifications > - when a server device goes down, observers for that should get > notification instead of trying to fetch resources of that device in vain. > > Without these, client applications need to do periodic discovery and > maintain their own lists of resources and devices. This is catastrophic for > network and battery efficiency when we scale it up to the projected number > of IoT devices. > > A resource/device directory should be able to encapsulate this - is a > resource directory guaranteed to be in the OCF network nowadays? > > I wonder what are the recommended client work flows the current OCF Core > spec is supporting. Right now it seems that a client first needs to look > for a resource directory; if there is one, use it. Otherwise set up > periodic discovery and maintain own resource/device list. > > Thanks, > Zoltan > > > _______________________________________________ > iotivity-dev mailing list > iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org > https://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20161129/8ff51ad4/attachment.html>
