[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1767?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15873677#comment-15873677
]
ASF GitHub Bot commented on NIFI-1767:
--------------------------------------
Github user trixpan commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/1521#discussion_r101916101
--- Diff:
nifi-nar-bundles/nifi-aws-bundle/nifi-aws-processors/src/main/java/org/apache/nifi/processors/aws/iot/util/IoTMessage.java
---
@@ -0,0 +1,44 @@
+/*
+ * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more
+ * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed with
+ * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership.
+ * The ASF licenses this file to You under the Apache License, Version 2.0
+ * (the "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance with
+ * the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
+ *
+ * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+ *
+ * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+ * distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+ * WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+ * See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+ * limitations under the License.
+ */
+package org.apache.nifi.processors.aws.iot.util;
+
+import org.eclipse.paho.client.mqttv3.MqttMessage;
+
+public class IoTMessage {
+ private final String topic;
+ private final byte[] payload;
+ private final Integer qos;
+
+ public IoTMessage(MqttMessage message, String topic) {
--- End diff --
**JPercivall**
MqttMessage also offers the "isDuplicate" and "isRetained" methods. Is
there a reason for not including these as part of IoTMessage and passing onto
the FlowFile as attributes?
> AWS IoT processors
> ------------------
>
> Key: NIFI-1767
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-1767
> Project: Apache NiFi
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Extensions
> Reporter: Kay Lerch
> Attachments: 20160413_apache-nifi-aws-iot-pull-request_lerchkay.pdf
>
>
> Four new processors to communicate with Amazon’s managed device gateway
> service AWS IoT.
> h5.Use cases
> * Consume reported states from a fleet of things managed and secured on
> Amazon’s gateway service
> * Propagate desired states to a fleet of things managed and secured on
> Amazon’s gateway service
> * Intercept M2M communication
> * Hybrid IoT solutions: brings together a managed device gateway in the cloud
> and onpremise data-consumers and -providers.
> h4.GetIOTMqtt:
> Opens up a connection to an AWS-account-specific websocket endpoint in order
> to subscribe to any of the MQTT topics belonging to a registered thing in AWS
> IoT.
> h4.PutIOTMqtt
> Opens up a connection to an AWS-account-specific websocket endpoint in order
> to publish messages to any of the MQTT topics belonging to a registered thing
> in AWS IoT.
> h4.GetIOTShadow
> In AWS IoT a physical thing is represented with its last reported state by
> the so-called thing shadow. This processor reads out the current state of a
> shadow (persisted as JSON) by requesting the managed API of AWS IoT.
> h4.PutIOTShadow
> In AWS IoT a physical thing is represented with its last reported state by
> the so-called thing shadow. This processor updates the current state of a
> shadow (persisted as JSON) by requesting the managed API of AWS IoT. An
> update to a shadow lets AWS IoT propagate changes to the MQTT topics of the
> thing.
> h5.Known issues:
> * It was hard for me to write appropriate integration tests since the MQTT
> processors work with durable websocket-connections which are kind of tough to
> test. With your help I would love to do a better job on testing and hand it
> in later on. All of the processors were tested in a live-scenario which ran
> over a longer period of time. Didn’t observe any issue.
> * I got rid of all the properties for the deprecated
> AWSCredentialProviderService and only made use of
> AWSCredentialsProviderControllerService. If both are still necessary for
> backward-compatibilities sake I would add the deprecated feature.
> Refers to Pull Request 349: https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/349
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
