Subject: [core] pubsub and sleepy node proxy

From: peter van der Stok <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2015 09:05:59 +0200

Hi Michael,

Looking at the pubsub draft and at our sleepy node proxy draft, I come 
to the conclusion that there are good arguments to maintain both.

Following the reasoning of Matthieu Vial, there are already a good 
arguments for the sleepy node (SN) proxy (aka mirror server) to exist 
next to the RD.
Namely:
Where an end-point can delegate its links to the RD for discovery, an 
end-point can delegate the links AND the associated resource values to 
the SN-proxy.
The SN-proxy resources have the same lifetime as SN resources.
The SN-proxy resource values are directly linked to the resources of a 
given SN.

In contrast the pubsub handles anonymous values. The origin can be added 
but that means adding attributes to the topics.
The pubsub handles the more abstract topics, where the SN-proxy is 
concerned with the resources.
The lifetime of the values in the pubsub server is not directly linked 
to the lifetime of the originating resources.

For me these are the arguments that motivate the existence of the pubsub 
draft next to the sleepy node draft.

Looking forward to your reaction.

Greetings
Teresa and Peter