I suppose it does not make sense to change the spec to using JSON-RPC
notification, then allow for deviation.
So, could we see if there is a consensus for one of the following?
Option 1: No change to Draft 06: notifySpectrumUse is a JSON-RPC request,
with a response that contains only the message type and version:
{
"jsonrpc": "2.0",
"result": {
"type": "SPECTRUM_USE_RESP",
"version": "1.0"
},
"id": "xxxxxxx"
}
Option 2: Change notifySpectrumUse to be a pure JSON-RPC notification that
will not have a JSON-RPC response (i.e., empty HTTP response body).
Thanks.
-vince
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Michael Head <[email protected]> wrote:
> If spectrum_use_notify is a pure JSON-RPC notification, this could be a
> problem for our implementation.
>
> We can't easily guarantee that the there would be no JSON-RPC response
> body for this method, but I believe JSON-RPC requires this for notification
> calls.
>
> If clients would ignore any body included in the response, then it would
> be fine for us, but I suppose the specification would need to make special
> note of that deviation from the JSON-RPC spec.
>
> Thanks,
> -- mike
>
> --
> ----------------------------------
> Michael R Head <[email protected]>
> http://www.cs.binghamton.edu/~mike
> +1-201-BLISTER
>
> _______________________________________________
> paws mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
>
>
--
-vince
_______________________________________________
paws mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/paws
