An Implementer's Perpsective

[Tim Kellogg <tim@2lemetry.com>]

Hi all,

I’m sure some of you have seen this post already. It has some good points and some meaningless flame-war-instigating comments. Regardless, it is well written and thought-out, I’d like us to take these criticisms to heart and try to make changes where possible. Of course, not everything is worth responding to, but lets use this as input for MQTT 4.0.

http://vasters.com/clemensv/2014/06/02/MQTT+An+Implementers+Perspective.aspx

"I very strongly believe that MQTT 3.1.1 cannot be implemented correctly providing anything but QoS 0 assurance at the scale we provide, and I'm not feeling comfortable of providing anything but a QoS 0 assurance for MQTT by the words of the spec, because MQTT 3.1.1 is a fundamentally broken protocol at the present time. I can still provide "at least once", but only with the mentioned workaround of assuming that subscriptions for a given client are established out of band."

Tim Kellogg

Sr. Software Engineer, Protocols

2lemetry

605-593-7099

@kellogh