Daniel Felsing wrote: > I know that you're the same stefano lenzi :) > The message was just copied from a mail directed to you and francesco. > > > And what would fix my problem u think?... > Cause you've now heard a lot by my posts..i'm curious what u think could > solve the issue.. > Cause IF it is really caused by UDP messages this issue will always occur if > someone will release a lot of devices (well 17 aren't really a lot but ok) > using the upnp base driver. And a smart home can have a LOT of devices in it > :)
UPnP event are meant to be best-effort because they are meant to be non-critical information which if lost will be received in the next changing of the value or anytime the device decide to send the event. We probably should try to updated the CyberDomo and the CyberLink stack in way to make it more Thread, but we also keep in consideration power constraint device, because our goal is to make the UPnP Base Driver run either on JDK1.3 and embedded system. Up to now we have neglected to fix the CyberDomo with the patch propose on the forum because it could have a impact on power constraint device and because it was limited to discovery in rare occasion, now that we herd of the problem related to the event I think we should reconsider the issue > > > Btw.: i did a workaround in my code.. That's good :) > > I'm internalising the upnp eventing in my layered architecture to a "event > admin" bus sending unified messages. > The initial message i send now when the object (which is refining > upnpdevice) is created by getting the values by the offered > upnpaction.invoke. > > --------> Is invoke done by TCP? Cause then my initial eventing is safe from > now on :) <----------- Yes it is :) > > > Status updates i get by upnpsubscriber which does a upnpnotify on my > refining objects...and they are only internalised to my bus if variables > really change > > And logoff messages on my event admin bus are sent when the refining driver > removes the object and calls destroy on it... > > > :) > > Kind regards, > Daniel > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Stefano Lenzi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Gesendet: Freitag, 25. Juli 2008 16:39 > An: [email protected] > Betreff: Re: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: AW: bug in felix upnp basedriver 0.8 > ........m-search the problem? AH ... one more note... > > Daniel Felsing wrote: >> Please Mr Lenzi...take a look at that... >> >> >> Is it possible that my issue is connected to this one mentioned in the >> cyberlink forum? > > Yes it is possible but only because we are speaking about the UDP > communication > >> Stefano answered to it in the cyberlink forum!! >> http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?thread_id=1952657&forum_id=258158 >> > > I'm the same Stafano Lenzi whom is cited in the thread > >> take a look at it...is this issue already fixed in the current base driver >> of felix? > > No it has not yet integrated and it won't fix your problem anyway > >> >> >> Kind regards, >> Daniel >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
