Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Improve LWM2M Model Validation. #835

Closed
sbernard31 opened this issue Apr 22, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

Improve LWM2M Model Validation. #835

sbernard31 opened this issue Apr 22, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels
bsserver Impact LWM2M bootstrap server client Impact LWM2M client new feature New feature from LWM2M specification server Impact LWM2M server

Comments

@sbernard31
Copy link
Contributor

#833 reveals some issue about LWM2M Model.
Most important one was fixed in #834 without any API break for the 1.0.x.

But we should consider more API impacting improvement for 1.1 or 2.0, like :

  • create a LWM2M Model Validator which should be used to avoid to load invalid model in a LWM2M server or client.
  • Eventually use the Validator for DDFFileParser to log issue.
  • DDFFileParser should use XML schema for validation too.
  • create a NONE value for Type enum for more consistency.
@sbernard31
Copy link
Contributor Author

@chelmertz I added a lot model validation feature with #851. You could have a look if you are interested.

@sbernard31
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jpradocueva I added some LWM2M Model/ DDF file validation tooling in Leshan (see #851)
Maybe this could be useful for OMA to validate your model ? (I guess you probably have some tooling for that but I share this with you just in case)

@sbernard31
Copy link
Contributor Author

#851 is now integrated in master. (will be available in 1.1)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bsserver Impact LWM2M bootstrap server client Impact LWM2M client new feature New feature from LWM2M specification server Impact LWM2M server
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant