I totally agree with the HTTP point of view. In my sensors I'm deploying a minimalistic web server to offer XML-based reports of data sensors. Now I'm using non-compressed data and the performance is poor, but I see this approach (http) as a good solution.
Simplicity for developers is essential. Joaquin Cabezas. > Brian, > > I think pointing to HTTP is very good thinking. > > You are actually selling it short: > >> every sensor on the planet can be given a URL > > It's the *resource* on the sensor that is given a URL. > One sensor may (and is likely to have) multiple resources. > > The following are some of the problems we would have to work on with > HTTP: > > -- uses TCP (easily fixed for small data units) > -- HTTP headers use chatty encoding (fixable) > -- HTTP uses request-response, not push (many ways to fix, need to > select one/some) > -- security > > Gruesse, Carsten > > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan > _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
