tmedicci commented on PR #15962: URL: https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/15962#issuecomment-2714146344
> > So if I understand this correctly, NuttX is still missing network implementation that would allow a proper use case of ESPNOW? > > I don't think this is true. NuttX is missing some love and care for ipv6 over sixlowpan. As espnow is using ipv6 over sixlowpan it is probably the first in a long time to encounter these problems. They can be fixed (and I'm working on them). This will also allow other parts to benefit from the care (e.g. ieee802.15.4). > > Should espnow network support be considered as `EXPERIMENTAL` ? Yes I think this would be right, but this would also be valid for the complete sixlowpan support (which has been in the tree for a very long time). No, I don't think so. If I understood correctly, the sixlowpan support needs to be improved. Let's move on and treat these problems in a different issue/PR. Following your instructions, everything works as expected: My suggestion: just update the documentation and let's merge this PR. Please, @Laczen , can you open the following issues: 1. One for the sixlowpan issue reported [here](https://github.com/apache/nuttx/pull/15962#issuecomment-2711291476). 2. An issue for adding a check for the second problem (the channel plan). I suggest inserting a check for it on `espnow_recv_cb` and `espnow_send_cb` and saving the current channel to the espnow's structure. If the current channel is different, we can call `espnow_ifdown/espnow_ifup` (that should solve the problem). This doesn't need to be done here in my opinion. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@nuttx.apache.org For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: us...@infra.apache.org
