Esko Dijk <[email protected]> wrote: > An example discovery interaction from cBRSKI:
> ~~~~ REQ: GET coap://[ff02::fd]/.well-known/core?rt=brski.jp
> RES: 2.05 Content
> <coaps://[fe80::c78:e3c4:58a0:a4ad]:8485>;rt=brski.jp ~~~~
Also, it could be a multicast query, right?
So :: means, protocol specific thing? Or does it mean use the IP address in
the header of the reply?
> Knowing the client MUST follow this procedure for the resource, the
> server could decide to not disclose the IPv6 address: i.e. leave it
> unspecified in scope of the Link Format document. RFC 4291 and RFC
> 4861 would allow such use of the unspecified address; and per RFC
> 3986/6690 it yields a valid CoRE link.
yes.
> Does this sound like a proper use of Link Format? It does seem to make
> sense that we can suppress information that's already encoded in the
If it's not forbidden, then it's allowed?
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
