Esko Dijk <esko.d...@iotconsultancy.nl> wrote: --> For completeness the server should also respond with the BRSKI root resource, which matches the filter. So:
> RES: 2.05 Content > <coaps+jpy://[2001:db8:0:abcd::52]:7634>;rt=brski.rjp, > <coaps://[2001:db8:0:abcd::52]/.well-known/brski>;rt=brski, okay. > The motivation why to do this particular query is not so clear in the > document. I assume the following was intended: > 1. JP wanting to find out if stateful JP is supported in this network: > it can send this (without the asterisk) > REQ: GET /.well-known/core?rt=brski > 2. JP wanting to find out if stateless JP is supported: > REQ: GET /.well-known/core?rt=brski.rjp > 3. JP wanting to find out both in a single query: > REQ: GET /.well-known/core?rt=brski* Yes, sounds reasonable. > In case 1 and 3 the JP may be looking for "rt=brski" in the > response. Hence, in our example the rt=brski resource must be > present. Otherwise, no interoperability. > Note that the JP won't care about the details of the /rv, /vs, /es > resources. It just needs Registrar address and port. Agreed. -- ] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [ ] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | network architect [ ] m...@sandelman.ca http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima