Opened 10 years ago

Closed 10 years ago

#221 closed protocol defect (fixed)

Occasionally sending CON is not just a security consideration

Reported by: cabo@… Owned by: draft-ietf-core-observe@…
Priority: minor Milestone: post-WGLC-1
Component: observe Version: observe-05
Severity: In WG Last Call Keywords:


Cullen Jennings notes (msg03073a):

Imagine a server that always sends non confirmable requests. Does it send forever? Even after client crashes and a new device that is not CoAP aware gets the same IP address?


This is currently discussed in the security considerations, but only for NoSec? mode.
The need to at least occasionally intersperse CONs needs to be discussed earlier (and explained in more detail, msg03073i).

Another reason for sending a CON at certain points:

Just sending NON for a long time does not guarantee eventual consistency.

Change History (2)

comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by fluffy@…

Point out this may be too often - for example sensors that wake up once a week.

Point made many applications need to do it much more frequently.

People seemed OK with this. Move forward with this change.

comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by hartke@…

  • Resolution set to fixed
  • Status changed from new to closed

Fixed in [1193]:

Closes #221

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.