[OASIS Issue Tracker] (MQTT-605) Should packets be identified as multicast or unicast exclusively?

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

    [ https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-605?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=84050#comment-84050 ] 

Ian Craggs commented on MQTT-605:
---------------------------------

[~davide.lenzarini] [~sdrees] I think it's ok to use either the term multicast or broadcast, given that in the MQTT-SN specification we will not be talking about UDP/IP in particular, but whichever term we use, we define it to cover both concepts in a general, non-transport specific way.

So, I would be happy to revert to the term broadcast, and define it to include the concept of multicast, if we want to go that way. I would like to avoid the clunky "multicast/broadcast" type of phrase that we were starting to introduce, because that makes the document less readable.

So we should decide whether we prefer broadcast or multicast as that term. I think I slightly prefer broadcast, in that it seems likely to be a more broadly familiar term.

> Should packets be identified as multicast or unicast exclusively?
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: MQTT-605
>                 URL: https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/MQTT-605
>             Project: OASIS Message Queuing Telemetry Transport (MQTT) TC
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: MQTT-SN
>    Affects Versions: v2.0
>            Reporter: Ian Craggs
>            Assignee: Ian Craggs
>            Priority: Major
>
> In the 1.2 specification, the ADVERTISE, SEARCHGW and GWINFO are identified as being "broadcasted" to potentially multiple receivers, whereas the other packets are not. The question here is whether we should continue to identify these packets (and PUBLISH QoS -1,- or out of band) as broadcast (or multicast) only in normative text, or just call this out as implementation advice non-normatively.
> Andy Banks is concerned that if it is the latter, then interoperability could be affected.
> Ian Craggs thinks that which address to send packets on is an implementation decision, like the TCP/IP address and port of the MQTT broker in MQTT.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.3#803004)