[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [mqtt-comment] MQTT v5.0 RETAIN optional
Hi Christoph, Reviewing our charter scope -
https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/mqtt/charter.php - may offer some insights into our objectives for this version: The scope of the TC's work is limited to technical refinements of features organized into the following categories:
MQTT enhancements for large scale distributed systems has been tracked in
https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-276 and was extensively discussed in the TC. Regarding “Would you include in the v5 specification a section were all features which became optional compared to MQTT3.1.1”
in your related messages about optional features, I added a comment to -
https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-291. Thank you for your feedback, …Brian From: mqtt-comment@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:mqtt-comment@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of c@ckrey.de Dear committee members, I may be a bit late in the process, but I am very concerned about the future direction of MQTT: RETAINed messages have always been a key feature of MQTT and are substantial for applications which do not want to implement a secondary transport to modify or query status information. Your current working draft #11 shows the broker support of RETAINed messages and wills as „MAY“ while MQTT3.1.1 insists on a „MUST“ for a broker to be compliant. I know that a number of major IoT platforms decided not to make RETAIN available over MQTT (e.g. AWS IoT, IBM IoT Foundation Services). Please review your decision to make support or RETAINed messages optional. Otherwise I see - interoperability issues between applications and brokers (think bridging) - more complex client application - a decrease in the use of MQTT Cheers Christoph Krey <c@ckrey.de> 7582 9188 8D6C E945 15BA 4CD9 900D FB34 2AB0 38D7 |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]