Craig,
My name is Kyle Neumeier, and I am the engine lead at Pramari, the
company that is developing rifidi.  I am actually going to answer this
question on both this list and the rifidi-users list because there may
be people who are interested on both.

First thing: The LLRP Reader is still under heavy development.  We are
actually working on the notification issue now, and it will work in our
next release, which will come out in a couple of weeks.

As for the second issue, as the others said, please post the pcap file
or xml, so that we can see.  I am not sure if it is a rifidi error, a
client error, or a toolkit error.

Thanks,
Kyle

On Tue, 2007-09-25 at 13:42 +0100, Craig Graham wrote:
> This is a general LLRP question I posted to the Rifidi list, but given I'm
> working on a toolkit in dotnet to conform to the EPC spec and the XML
> schema the toolkit is using I thought it worth copying here. The dotnet
> thing I'm working on will be commercial, though, which may influence how
> welcome I am here..
> 
> I've started playing with LLRP and using Rifidi as the target (also
> playing with Intelleflex but wanting to avoid locking into possibly
> non-spec dialects).
> 
> According to the EPC spec 1.0.1 section 18.1, when we connect to an LLRP
> compliant reader the first thing it's supposed to send is a status report
> message, and clients aren't supposed to send anything until receiving that
> message.
> 
> I've set up Rifidi to give me an LLRP reader, but when I establish a TCP
> connection to the appropriate port it just sits there silently.
> 
> I've packet sniffed a simple LLRP client and discovered that as soon as
> the client connects, it sends a packet which I manually decode as being an
> ADD_ROSPEC message with parameters;
> 
> 1) an AccessSpec parameter
> 2) a C1G2TagInventoryStateAwareSingulationActionParameter
> 3) an ROSpec parameter and associated sub elements.
> 
> The reader then sends back a satisfactory ADD_ROSPEC_RESPONSE.
> 
> So I'm confused on two counts- first the fact the client doesn't wait and
> receive the initial status message and second that the first two of those
> three parameter blocks aren't valid as far as I can see in the spec, and
> yet all appears to be fine!
> 
> Can anyone enlighten me on this?
> 
> 
> 
> 


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
llrp-toolkit-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/llrp-toolkit-devel

Reply via email to