Re: [Ace] ace-coap-est: unclear definition of /.well-known/est URI

2018-09-20 Thread Michael Richardson
Esko Dijk wrote: > @Michael: > Since the EST resource is always present on the fixed port 5684 on URI > /.well-known/est - if a fixed port is needed e.g. for a join proxy, use > 5684 and the well-known URI. No discovery needed. I've asked if discovery is always required,

Re: [Ace] ace-coap-est: unclear definition of /.well-known/est URI

2018-09-20 Thread Michael Richardson
Esko Dijk wrote: > Indeed, and the ace-coap-est examples use port 61616 mostly. The > discovery Link Format is quite inefficient when returning results on > *different* endpoints. Example: > REQ: GET coap://[2001:db8::2:1]/.well-known/core?rt=ace.est > RES: 2.05 Content

Re: [Ace] ace-coap-est: unclear definition of /.well-known/est URI

2018-09-20 Thread Esko Dijk
Indeed, and the ace-coap-est examples use port 61616 mostly. The discovery Link Format is quite inefficient when returning results on *different* endpoints. Example: REQ: GET coap://[2001:db8::2:1]/.well-known/core?rt=ace.est RES: 2.05 Content ;rt="ace.est" Although in above case the server

Re: [Ace] ace-coap-est: unclear definition of /.well-known/est URI

2018-09-20 Thread Peter van der Stok
Michael Richardson schreef op 2018-09-20 16:51: > I didn't think that CoAP resource discovery supports port numbers, does it? > > It does; at least for the 3rd party registration, but also examples in the RD > show return of port___ Ace mailing list

Re: [Ace] ace-coap-est: unclear definition of /.well-known/est URI

2018-09-20 Thread Michael Richardson
Esko Dijk wrote: > To be fully complete the URIs that can be discovered should also > include a port number, as they could be hosted at 5684 or any available > UDP port - other than 5683. >coaps://www.example.com:// > coaps://www.example.com://ArbitraryLabel/ I