<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 10:22 AM, punit vara <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:punitvara@gmail.com" target="_blank">punitvara@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Can I port MQTT from here ?<br>
<br>
<a href="https://github.com/zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/tree/master/subsys/net/lib/mqtt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/<wbr>zephyrproject-rtos/zephyr/<wbr>tree/master/subsys/net/lib/<wbr>mqtt</a><br>
<br>
It has Apache licence. Where do I possibly need to add files ? Any suggestion ?<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br></font></span></blockquote><div>Why would Zephyr want their code to support multiple RTOSes? Would</div><div>we end up with something that has long-term life as an RTEMS option?</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
-- PV<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 7:50 PM, Joel Sherrill <<a href="mailto:joel@rtems.org">joel@rtems.org</a>> wrote:<br>
><br>
><br>
> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Gedare Bloom <<a href="mailto:gedare@rtems.org">gedare@rtems.org</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 1:26 AM, punit vara <<a href="mailto:punitvara@gmail.com">punitvara@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> > Hi<br>
>> ><br>
>> > I think RTEMS don't have any IoT protocol so I propose we should<br>
>> > implement at least two important IoT protocols<br>
>> ><br>
>> > 1. MQTT (<a href="http://docs.oasis-open.org/mqtt/mqtt/v3.1.1/mqtt-v3.1.1.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://docs.oasis-open.org/<wbr>mqtt/mqtt/v3.1.1/mqtt-v3.1.1.<wbr>html</a>)<br>
>> > 2. CoAP (<a href="http://coap.technology/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://coap.technology/</a>)<br>
>> ><br>
>> Why are these 2 important?<br>
>><br>
>> The problem to avoid is adopting a network protocol too early, because<br>
>> there is always a bunch of competing ones, and in the end only a<br>
>> handful will survive in the long term.<br>
><br>
><br>
> MQTT is an OASIS standard which is a good sign. It also has multiple<br>
> implementations<br>
> already with this one from the Eclipse Foundation looking very promising and<br>
> appropriate for RTEMS.<br>
><br>
> <a href="https://www.eclipse.org/paho/clients/c/embedded/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.eclipse.org/paho/<wbr>clients/c/embedded/</a><br>
><br>
> CoAP also looks promising since it has an RFC. And promising implementations<br>
> to investigate.<br>
><br>
> <a href="http://coap.technology/impls.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://coap.technology/impls.<wbr>html</a><br>
><br>
> <a href="https://github.com/obgm/libcoap" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/obgm/<wbr>libcoap</a> is dual licensed as GPL and BSD (why?).<br>
><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ><br>
>> > What's your opinion on this ? :)<br>
>> ><br>
>> This may be a good idea. What is the state of industry and of<br>
>> standardization in this space? Are there open-source reference<br>
>> implementations with a useful (BSD/MIT) license?<br>
>><br>
><br>
> I think those two are worth porting. There are already other ports to<br>
> embedded<br>
> environments so RTEMS should join the list.<br>
><br>
> The effort would have to get the RTEMS specific configuration and adaptation<br>
> code upstream, add RSB recipes, and examples with documentation. I would<br>
> honestly expect the ports to be easy enough where more work needs to be<br>
> identified. :)<br>
><br>
> --joel<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> Gedare<br>
>><br>
>> ><br>
>> > Regards<br>
>> > Punit Vara<br>
><br>
><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>