OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

mqtt message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] (MQTT-323) Comments from reading MQTT Version 5.0 WD08


    [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-323?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=64269#comment-64269 ] 

Ken Borgendale commented on MQTT-323:
-------------------------------------

2. The issues MQTT-300 (Maximum QoS) and MQTT-301 are only partially applied in the spec.  Therefore the property identifiers exist, but the property sections under CONNECT and CONNACK are missing, and the descriptions of error handling is not yet complete.

3. In the new text for section 4.10 we define Request Message and Response Message as proper names and so these will be in upper case when used with an exact meaning.  The work Reply should only be used as part of Reply Topic and Reply Info which are proper names.

4. This text is only slightly more complicated than it was in v3.1.1.  I did however put in a reference to section 3.8.3.1 where the subscription options are defined.  When MQTT-301 is applied I expect that it will include in this section the error handling for the case of a PUBLISH with RETAIN set when the Retain Unavailable is set.

6.  I agree and think that all reference to V3.1.1 should be dropped.  I lost that discussion but there is an issue about this: MQTT-291.

9. The return code 0x90 (Topic or topic filter not valid) is used to say the Topic or Topic Filter matches the MQTT requirement (or it would be a malformed packet) but is not acceptable in this allowed in this context.  What would you suggest for the name and description?

10.  Changed, and more importantly the Return code value 140 was reused so this one got renumbered.

11. The preferred format is: Return code 0x18 (Continue authentication).  I will look for instances where the other format is used.


> Comments from reading MQTT Version 5.0 WD08
> -------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MQTT-323
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-323
>             Project: OASIS Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: edits
>    Affects Versions: 5
>            Reporter: Andrew Schofield
>
> This issue contains a number of points against WD08.
> 1) Line 1008 - the convention "24 (0x18) Byte Identifier of the Will Delay Interval" is used heavily in the document but it's really hard to read. There's no style applied to the text. Just making "24 (0x18) Byte" bold would help a lot, particularly when there's a list of identifiers and types.
> 2) Line 735, table 2.6. "Maximum QoS" is identifier 36 in the table and apparently applies to CONNECT and CONNACK packets. The description of CONNECT and CONNACK does not describe this identifier.
> 3) General - The language around request/response is hard to follow. The words "response" and "reply" probably have specific and different meanings, but it doesn't look like they're applied consistently throughout the document.
> 4) Line 1476, section 3.3.1.3 - The description of the various subscription options which affect retained messages is very hard to follow. Perhaps the complexity is justified (I'm not convinced), but it certainly needs writing in a way that an implementor has a hope of understanding. The "Retain Unavailable Advertisement" ought to be mentioned in section 3.3.1.3 since it negates the effect of marking a message as retained.
> 5) Line 898 - what on earth is a "reasonable" amount of time?
> 6) Line 993 - It seems very strange that the MQTT 5.0 specification describes the effect of hopping between MQTT 3.1.1 and 5.0.
> 7) Line 995 - "Clean Start" is called "Clean Session" in MQTT 3.1.1.
> 8) Line 1258 - It's not clear when a new session is considered to be established.
> 9) Line 2113, table 3.10 - Value 144 "Topic filter not valid" has the description "The topic filter is valid...." which is contradictory. The description could be improved.
> 10) Line 2273, table 3.13 - Value 140 description contains the term "user". This isn't an MQTT term - should it be "Session"?
> 11) Line 2934 - The sentence containing "Return code of 0x18 - Continue authentication" is difficult to read. It would really help to use a style other than normal text or perhaps quotes to indicate the name of the return code ("0x18 - Continue authentication").



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


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]