Joseph,

A server may have three file descriptors (the fourth is only used for clients).

A typical server will only have two (since security will either be enabled or 
disabled.)

On a constrained server, only one connection will be active at a time 
(multicast initially, unicast thereafter.)

I don't think we can get below one. :-)

John


-----Original Message-----
From: Morrow, Joseph L 
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 1:52 PM
To: Macieira, Thiago
Cc: Light, John J; iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org
Subject: RE: [dev] Change in iotivity[master]: Integrated WIFI/ETHERNET 
adapters to single IPAdapter.

Hi Thiago,

I agree that this would be a fine implementation. However, we could be severely 
limiting the use-cases of a constrained platform with a finite number of 
sockets available to only being able to have one connection at a time. I'm not 
going to champion this, as I agree with your statement but I do think we should 
constantly keep the "constrained device" in mind at all times here. Without 
that, we could quickly become the 'Internet of Big Devices' - *ahem* which kind 
of already exists.

Thanks,

Joey
-----Original Message-----
From: Macieira, Thiago
Sent: Friday, April 24, 2015 4:39 PM
To: Morrow, Joseph L
Cc: Light, John J; iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org
Subject: Re: [dev] Change in iotivity[master]: Integrated WIFI/ETHERNET 
adapters to single IPAdapter.

For a single-purpose device whose purpose is to send and receive OIC protocol, 
using 3 of the 4 possible sockets for OIC seems reasonable to me.

The fourth socket could be a simple web server that delivers a highly 
compressed web app that is hardcoded to talk back to the device in question, 
via OIC protocol again.

On Friday 24 April 2015 13:02:42 Morrow, Joseph L wrote:
> I would like to add a general note about "sockets aren't expensive". 
> Currently, the Arduino WiFi (IIRC, it may have been the Ethernet 
> Shield, or
> both!) shields will only let you bind with up to 4 sockets at a time. 
> This makes sockets very expensive as we wouldn't want to leave the end 
> user with just 1 socket after our stack has used 3 of them!

--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

Reply via email to