You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
DOTS_protocol_specification_cheat_sheet.md refers to Content-Type option for CoAP while it should be called Content-Format. The content format is specified as application/cbor in the doc as well as in the source code but draft-ietf-dots-signal-channel specifies application/dots+cbor.
The URI-Path seems to be incorrect at least the cheat sheet as it specifies /.well-known/dots/v1/mitigate while the draft specifies /.well-known/dots/mitigate. The client code seems to be using the proper format but the server doesn't exactly verify it. By a quick look, it seems the server just looks if mitigate is defined in the URI, which isn't probably wrong as the draft mandates a certain order of options. To me it would sound reasonable to have versioned paths, too bad it's not currently allowed in the draft.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
DOTS_protocol_specification_cheat_sheet.md
refers toContent-Type
option for CoAP while it should be calledContent-Format
. The content format is specified asapplication/cbor
in the doc as well as in the source code butdraft-ietf-dots-signal-channel
specifiesapplication/dots+cbor
.The URI-Path seems to be incorrect at least the cheat sheet as it specifies
/.well-known/dots/v1/mitigate
while the draft specifies/.well-known/dots/mitigate
. The client code seems to be using the proper format but the server doesn't exactly verify it. By a quick look, it seems the server just looks ifmitigate
is defined in the URI, which isn't probably wrong as the draft mandates a certain order of options. To me it would sound reasonable to have versioned paths, too bad it's not currently allowed in the draft.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: