org.teleal.cling.protocol.async
Class ReceivingNotification
java.lang.Object
org.teleal.cling.protocol.ReceivingAsync<IncomingNotificationRequest>
org.teleal.cling.protocol.async.ReceivingNotification
- All Implemented Interfaces:
- Runnable
public class ReceivingNotification
- extends ReceivingAsync<IncomingNotificationRequest>
The following was added to the UDA 1.1 spec (in 1.3), clarifying the handling of messages:
"If a control point has received at least one 'byebye' message of a root device, embedded device, or
service, then the control point can assume that all are no longer available."
Of course, they contradict this a little later:
"Only when all original advertisements of a root device, embedded device, and services have
expired can a control point assume that they are no longer available."
This could mean that even if we get 'byeby'e for the root device, we still have to assume that its services
are available. That clearly makes no sense at all and I think it's just badly worded and relates to the
previous sentence wich says "if you don't get byebye's, rely on the expiration timeout". It does not
imply that a service or embedded device lives beyond its root device. It actually reinforces that we are
free to ignore anything that happens as long as the root device is not gone with 'byebye' or has expired.
Method Summary |
protected void |
execute()
|
ReceivingNotification
public ReceivingNotification(UpnpService upnpService,
IncomingDatagramMessage<UpnpRequest> inputMessage)
execute
protected void execute()
- Specified by:
execute
in class ReceivingAsync<IncomingNotificationRequest>
Copyright © 2010 Teleal GmbH, Switzerland. All Rights Reserved.