[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [tinydtls-dev] Question about current status/support with Contiki
|
It's based on Contiki 3.0 with a few fixes from latest Contiki related
to RPL and networking, and all the modifications needed for 6lbr. Maybe
one of the fixes related to network could solve your issue.
Kind regards,
Laurent.
On 2016-05-12 23:09, Raul Fuentes wrote:
Hello Laurent,
Just to have a quick comparative, your fork of Contiki is up-date?
I did my fork near to November, and all the tests have been taken the
branch of 3.0 as base.
I was wondering to fetch the all the recently commits and try again.
Plus, probably I'll try it with your fork :)
Sincerely, Raul Fuentes
2016-05-12 22:41 GMT+02:00 Laurent Deru <laurent.deru@xxxxxxxx>:
Hello,
In cetic 6lbr I have integrated the latest version from eclipse
repo and it works fine using Coojamotes and CC26xx (and I believe
CC2538 too) It has been validated with the tinyDTLS client as well
as Californium + Scandium. I don't remember any extra fixes except
for compilation issues, but I will have a look a gain, maybe I
forgot to report here a modification I did.
Kind regards,
Laurent.
On 2016-05-12 18:42, Raul Fuentes wrote:
TL;DR: The current code (Tinydtls 0.8.6) is not compatible with
Contiki 3.0.
This is due a change between the version of TinyDTLS 0.8.2
and
0.8.6 that only affects Contiki (I never had this issue with
RIOT).
BUT I was unable to track the problem, is not apparent in the
#Define contiki lines.
The main issue I'm having is the following: When the main
function
generates the destination addresses and stored it in the
session_t
variable everything is ok. BUT once the session is called from
the
event (read_peer) the data seems to be wrongly formatted, plus
seems
that MEMB is returning error. Example :
Dst addresses saved to the session (before dtls_connect) is
FE80::200:3 ,
Dst addresses returned at the events: : ::1200:08fe
I have two testing branches: CoAPS (0.8.2) and 6CoAPS (which has
an
0.8.6 tested with RIOT).
Both branches present the issue with 0.8.6.
Both branches can work with the 0.8.2 but only with the cipher
suite
PSK (WTH?) and very inefficient with a lot of retransmission.
I even tried using extern connections with the Linux client's
but
sadly they died in the translation from Cooja to the tunnel, and
my
real motes don't have enough memory for my tests.
Possible reason: I have count at least 3 "threads" (2 inside
of
TinyDTLS, one for the main program). Contiki threads are not real
threads and should be a minimum, but this mean re-working your
part of
Contiki.
This is very probably because is almost a lucky occasion when the
dtls-client is able to transmit.
---------------------
The behavior of Tinydtls 0.3.1 was too different with Contiki
2.6, but
those regression testing are too complex and I need to focus on
my
thesis.
_______________________________________________
tinydtls-dev mailing list
tinydtls-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tinydtls-dev [1]
_______________________________________________
tinydtls-dev mailing list
tinydtls-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tinydtls-dev [1]
Links:
------
[1] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tinydtls-dev
_______________________________________________
tinydtls-dev mailing list
tinydtls-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or
unsubscribe from this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/tinydtls-dev
