Hi, I understand that the comon opinion is that Arduino is not needed as no one is doing devices with it. This is true - agreed. One question: What is the chipset that IoTivity supports, that is equally cheap and small and actually used for IoT devices? If that exists, +2 from me for dropping Arduino.
thanks Christian > On 4 Mar 2017, at 00:58, Thiago Macieira <thiago.macieira at intel.com> wrote: > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > iotivity-dev mailing list > iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org > https://lists.iotivity.org/mailman/listinfo/iotivity-dev
