Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CoAP over TCP/TLS #257

Open
gbrgr opened this issue Jul 8, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

CoAP over TCP/TLS #257

gbrgr opened this issue Jul 8, 2021 · 1 comment
Labels
enhancement RFC 8323 Issues related to RFC 8323 (CoAP over TCP, TLS, and WebSockets)

Comments

@gbrgr
Copy link

gbrgr commented Jul 8, 2021

RFC 8323 specifies CoAP over TCP instead of UDP. Roughly speaking, the protocol is the same as in the UDP case, but measures that let the application detect duplicate messages and resolve ordering issues are not included within the TCP version of CoAP.

Questions that come to my mind are:

  • Is there any intention/timeline to support CoAP over TCP (or even TLS)?
  • Does an integration of the TCP case make sense to include in the current library? Can one estimate the refactoring efforts?

Thanks!

@Apollon77
Copy link
Collaborator

@gbrgr I think concrete plans or a timeline does not exist :-) So in fact check the code and we are happy to get a PR :-)

In fact when I read the code (veeeery rough checkup) correctly then it already could work if you initialize your tcp server outside and pass it as first parameter to the "listen" method - it needs to be an EventEmitter and emit events like the dgram socket. In fact mainly two places interact with dgram ... the server class and the agent class, so refactoring also to officially support tcp should be not too complex

@JKRhb JKRhb added the RFC 8323 Issues related to RFC 8323 (CoAP over TCP, TLS, and WebSockets) label Oct 10, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement RFC 8323 Issues related to RFC 8323 (CoAP over TCP, TLS, and WebSockets)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants