Re: [core] [Dots] Large asynchronous notifications under DDoS: New BLOCK Option?

[Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]>]

Hi Med,

thank you for updating me on this information!

On 2020-04-09, at 09:56, <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>> (b) the semantics of observe is that a notification is the whole new
>> state of the resource.  Proxies will implement it that way.  Of course
>> block2 modifies this semantics a bit, so nonblock2 might do that too.
>> Still, I think we need to consider what proxies (or client caches)
>> will make out of the mechanism we devise.
> 
> [Med] Agree for the generic CoAP case. 
> 
> For the particular case of DOTS, sessions are established hop-by-hp when a proxy (we called it, gateway) is involved. We have the full visibility on what happens.   

So you have application-aware proxies (which may not even be CoAP proxies).

But that doesn’t mean other proxies aren’t involved; there is also the matter of client caches, which have similar properties (caching, but no multiplexing).  So far, we have tried to keep the proxy/client-caching concept valid with extensions on CoAP; this would be the first one where we would have to say “no CoAP proxies can be used”.  I was wondering whether we can avoid this situation (can = don’t make the solution too complex).

Grüße, Carsten