3 ms·
Check out http://www.ccnx.org/ http://www.ccnx.org/ for another protocol with similar intentions. CCNX supports a whole load more, including unified routing and
by forgotusername 15y ago
Check out http://www.ccnx.org/ http://www.ccnx.org/ for another protocol with similar intentions. CCNX supports a whole load more, including unified routing and caching, multi-path, enumeration, isn't designed just for small data (i.e. it's perfectly feasible to publish/retrieve terabyte-sized videos over it), and originated with a team that included Van Jacobsen.
MQTT seems more focused on small devices and ultra-low bandwidth, which could be a good or bad thing. Considering the overheads of CCNX (header size is 64-128 bytes IIRC), I'm not convinced a minimalist protocol for this stuff is such a good idea, given even the tinyest hardware around these days, and currently prevalent wireless communications protocols could already easily handle something that heavy.
- deleted 15y ago[deleted]