Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-option to *enable* responses
Abhijan Bhattacharyya <abhijan.bhattacharyya@tcs.com> Fri, 22 April 2016 15:16 UTC
Return-Path: <prvs=913c8372d=abhijan.bhattacharyya@tcs.com>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A5312E178 for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 08:16:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -5.196
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.196 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.996, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YNdIXsG0Fa7u for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 08:16:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from inkolg01.tcs.com (inkolg01.tcs.com [121.241.215.10]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 424E312DEB4 for <core@ietf.org>; Fri, 22 Apr 2016 08:16:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A2DPAQCwPRpX/wQXEqxegmyBH326BgENgXMXAQyFagKBXxQBAQEBAQEBgQyEQQEBAQRuCxALBwYEAwECKAdGCQgGCwgbiB2tLAEBAZFqAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFYR4Z4UNhCABAQUjFQ0JghJLGIIrBY5GiUmBVYoHhB4XhDaIXY8vHgEBhDVkAYdBgTUBAQE
X-IPAS-Result: A2DPAQCwPRpX/wQXEqxegmyBH326BgENgXMXAQyFagKBXxQBAQEBAQEBgQyEQQEBAQRuCxALBwYEAwECKAdGCQgGCwgbiB2tLAEBAZFqAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBFYR4Z4UNhCABAQUjFQ0JghJLGIIrBY5GiUmBVYoHhB4XhDaIXY8vHgEBhDVkAYdBgTUBAQE
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.24,517,1454956200"; d="scan'208";a="76966849"
In-Reply-To: <3c1e2750c7ac4d2b98509e3446d122dd@HE1PR9001MB0170.MGDPHG.emi.philips.com>
References: <3c1e2750c7ac4d2b98509e3446d122dd@HE1PR9001MB0170.MGDPHG.emi.philips.com>
To: "Dijk, Esko" <esko.dijk@philips.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-KeepSent: CFA8A8D6:870A6124-65257F9D:004F040B; type=4; name=$KeepSent
X-Mailer: IBM Notes Release 9.0 March 08, 2013
Message-ID: <OFCFA8A8D6.870A6124-ON65257F9D.004F040B-65257F9D.0053ED78@tcs.com>
From: Abhijan Bhattacharyya <abhijan.bhattacharyya@tcs.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 20:46:42 +0530
X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on INKOLM102/TCS(Release 9.0.1FP4HF942 | April 13, 2016) at 04/22/2016 20:46:45, Serialize complete at 04/22/2016 20:46:45
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_alternative 0053ED7665257F9D_="
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/42uWpzF28HGxiiTuk3ucGYinudw>
Cc: Nevil Brownlee <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>, "core@ietf.org WG" <core@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-option to *enable* responses
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2016 15:16:53 -0000
Hi Esko, Thanks for your mail. First of all let me just bring this to your (as well as the mailing list's) notice that the latest version of the draft is: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-tcs-coap-no-response-option-16.txt This version "officially" closes the technical reviews and is with the RFC editor through the IS track. Now coming to your use case (and indeed it is an interesting one) one thing that we should consider is that the No-Response option was deliberately designed not to mandate anything for the server side mainly to ensure that it does not disrupt the many usefulness of the usual request/response symantics. The draft all along deals with the requesting client's behaviour and its expression of interest to the server. Since this option is elective we leave it upto the server implementation to honour the client's interest. Now, as per usual request/response symantics the responses are always enabled. The behaviour in groupcomm server in terms of suppressing the responses on its own is something special and, generally speaking, the clients are not aware of such special behaviour. So, it would be justified to handle the situation at the server's end. Here is the idea: While No-Response is to expresses client's dis-interest in some or all of the responses depending on the option value, it is also true that the option automatically expresses interest in all other responses (marked by 0's in the respective positions). The client is going to wait for these responses upto a given timeout. Now, if the server behaviour is modified like this : "I have closed my door for all out going response. **BUT**, if I see a fellow requesting with No-Response and keeping windows open to some responses then I assume that this guy really needs those kind of responses. In that case let me be linient and let me open the door for such responses. This fellow must be available to listen to them as per the prescribed behaviour in the No-Response specification." Mandating such server behaviour from the client side will be a bit out-of-sync with the spirit of the specification. Regards Abhijan Bhattacharyya Associate Consultant Scientist, Innovation Lab, Kolkata, India Tata Consultancy Services Mailto: abhijan.bhattacharyya@tcs.com Website: http://www.tcs.com ____________________________________________ Experience certainty. IT Services Business Solutions Consulting ____________________________________________ From: "Dijk, Esko" <esko.dijk@philips.com> To: Abhijan Bhattacharyya <abhijan.bhattacharyya@tcs.com> Cc: Nevil Brownlee <rfc-ise@rfc-editor.org>, "core@ietf.org WG" <core@ietf.org> Date: 04/22/2016 05:43 PM Subject: Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-option to *enable* responses Hello Abhijan, in our project we see a clear use case of using the No-Response Option to *enable* certain responses that are by default suppressed. CoAP allows suppression of multicast responses by default, which is what we use for a lighting multicast use case. However for diagnostic usage we'd like to enable these responses again using the No-Response option which is perfectly suited for that. However, the draft text currently only talks about suppressing responses (not enabling). Hence my request: could we modify/add some text to show that also the option can be used to enable responses in case where they are normally (by default -- server decision) suppressed? Just to clarify such usage; which is quite useful in my view. regards Esko ________________________________ The information contained in this message may be confidential and legally protected under applicable law. The message is intended solely for the addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, forwarding, dissemination, or reproduction of this message is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by return e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. =====-----=====-----===== Notice: The information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and immediately and permanently delete the message and any attachments. Thank you
- [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-option to… Dijk, Esko
- Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-optio… Abhijan Bhattacharyya
- Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-optio… Dijk, Esko
- Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-optio… Abhijan Bhattacharyya
- Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-optio… Dijk, Esko
- Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-optio… Abhijan Bhattacharyya
- Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-optio… Dijk, Esko
- Re: [core] Using draft-tcs-coap-no-response-optio… Abhijan Bhattacharyya