[OASIS Issue Tracker] (MQTT-301) Metadata: CONNACK Retained messages supported

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

    [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-301?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=63701#comment-63701 ] 

Ed Briggs commented on MQTT-301:
--------------------------------

I propose the following behavior for the RETAIN unavailable advertisement and processing.

1. If a Server support Retain, it MUST NOT send a RETAIN UNAVAILABLE in the CONNACK.
2. If a Server does not wish to support RETAIN, it MUST send a RETAIN UNAVAILABLE advertisement on the CONNACK if a CONNACK is sent.
3. If a Server does not wish to support RETAIN, and it receives a CONNECT with a Will RETAIL indication, it ignores the RETAIN but processes the CONNECT normally and returns the appropriate return code in the CONNACK  with a RETAIN UNAVAILABLE advertisement.
4. If a Server does not wish to support RETAIN and receives a PUBLISH with a RETAIN flag set, it simply ignores the RETAIN flag and processes the PUBLISH normally.

Notes:   
1. The Error code 'retain not supported' will be removed from the standard

2.  The behavior has the effect of making RETAIN an optional feature for a Server. The notifies the Client if RETAIN support is absent. It is the Client Application responsibility
to check for the Retain Unavailable advertisement, and decide what if any action it might take. 

> Metadata: CONNACK Retained messages supported
> ---------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MQTT-301
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-301
>             Project: OASIS Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) TC
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: core
>    Affects Versions: 5
>            Reporter: Brian Raymor
>            Assignee: Ed Briggs
>
> This was discussed in MQTT-276 with notes from the F2F meetings and has been tracked in MQTT-256. 
> I'm opening a separate, specific issue per Ken's comments - https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-256?focusedCommentId=62192&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-62192:
> "All of these would be defined in separate JIRAs, but what we should do in this JIRA is to define the mechanism used to pass these values."



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2.2#6258)