On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 3:28 PM Mark Trayer <[email protected]> wrote:
> Greetings, > > > > “Case in point: the 2.0 Cloud spec is incompatible with the core spec.” > > > > Could you expand on that some (if it’s broke, we’d like to fix it)? > Hi Mark, Sorry for not getting back sooner. Briefly: OCF Cloud has an RD that munges the href and completely changes (lies about) the eps. You can do that, but the result is not a Resource Directory (which cannot do that). OCF Cloud also subverts the OCF security model (IMHO). More generally, OCF Cloud is effectively a specification of an OCF Reverse Proxy, as far as I can tell. There are many ways to do that; why enshrine one implementation as "official? (And why on Earth call it "OCF Cloud"?) Even more generally: what precisely is the problem OCF Cloud purports to solve? Until we know what we cannot evaluate it. E.g. why do we need an account server? You (or Samsung) might need that, but that does not mean everybody does. E.g. why is a conformant RD not sufficient? Why do we need to funnel requests through a reverse proxy? Doesn't that defeat the very purpose of ipv6? Etc. etc. Hth Gregg > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#9827): https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/message/9827 Mute This Topic: https://lists.iotivity.org/mt/23757849/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
