Re: [core] CoAP requirements and HTTP iwf

If I recall, the CoRE charter removed the mapping devices (CoGII is what I
think they were back in the original CoAP charter).  I think CoRE only
focused on development of a RESTful architecture implementation over
transports that are not constrained to be TCP (ie, UDP is supported).

I think we will make a mistake by having a discussion on mapping to HTTP
since the discussion below will take place ("what about XMPP mappings",
"what about SIP mappings", etc.).  

If we architect CoRE for mappings to all of these other standards I am
doubtful it ever achieves it primary goal of a simple RESTful protocol
implementation for constrained devices.

Don

-----Original Message-----
From: core-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:core-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
Adriano Pezzuto (apezzuto)
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 2:09 AM
To: core@ietf.org
Subject: [core] CoAP requirements and HTTP iwf

Hello,
a great session in Anaheim!

For what concerns CoAP and HTTP mapping (REQ7: of
draft-shelby-core-coap-req-00), I understood that there is not "the"
CoAP-HTTP mapping but more possible ways to do the mapping are possible.
Also, further mappings, e.g.  CoAP-XMPP,   CoAP-SIP, ..  might be
defined in the future, if required.

What about to split the CoAP specs from the  CoaP-*P mapping specs? I
mean to have different specs for CoAP core protocol, CoAP-HTTP mapping,
CoAP-XMPP mapping, CoAP-*P mapping and so on.

Not sure if this make sense ...

regards,
Adriano
_______________________________________________
core mailing list
core@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core