Em sexta-feira, 3 de mar?o de 2017, ?s 06:36:17 PST, Matta Jayaram escreveu:
> Dear Team,
> Should IoTivity Arduino support be dropped?
In my opinion, yes.
> Before answering above question ,
>
> 1.we know that arduino Wifi / Ethernet shield will not support multicast.
That is currently a problem, but one that I plan to fix with a Constrained
profile. Constrained devices should not be required to listen on multicast.
They should also be allowed to shut down their radios for extended periods of
time.
>
> 2.Even if we use unicast also we are unable to create multiple resouces
> with it (1.a/fan,2.a/light...etc)
Why not? That has nothing to do with the hardware, only the amount of
resources permitted. And besides, certain devices may not need more than one
resource anyway (in addition to the OCF-mandated ones).
> 3.Unable to process payload more than 255 bytes
That could be a problem.
> 4.When IoTivity client is Performing Discovery its destination address is
> always 4097.
Address? Do you mean port number? And why is this a factor?
> if you Drop the Arduino Boards Support No problem, But if you
> Drop the Arduino SDK support then as per my understanding we are unable to
> Build IoTivity for Arduino SDK Supported Boards like ESP8266,nrf5XX....etc
> Modules.
Right. As I've said multiple times, I don't think it's useful for us to spend
time maintaiing support for the Arduino SDK. I will say once again why:
No one thinking seriously of making devices uses them.
Arduino never leads to products and I can say this after talking to a lot of
people. It never proceeds further than a proof-of-concept phase.
> If you provide Arduino SDK Support on IoTivity - Constrained
> side then it's ok
No one is volunteering to do that.
If someone volunteers and the changes to Constrained do not otherwise hinder
or pollute the codebase, it can be accepted.
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
