choosing a standard
Flemming Richter Mikkelsen
quatrox at gmail.com
Wed Apr 2 16:05:26 CEST 2008
On 4/1/08, Tilman Baumann <tilman at baumann.name> wrote:
> Just found this.
> Claims to take the pain away from using upnp. Maybe that's just enough.
> Benefit of upnp would be, that there are already many devices out there. And
> if 'the industry'[tm] chooses any as standard, it will probably be this.
Thank you for the information.
I briefly looked at upnp today, and while it seems to have defined
standards for lights (on/off and dimmable), I get a feeling it could
be a bit too complex. What I liked with gupnp is that it offers a nice
I do not think upnp will be the right thing, as it is designed for
devices which supports TCP/IP (correct me if I am wrong here). My
routers has upnp, but the devices I will connect to them (lights, etc)
will only have a small micro controller (atmega8 or similar) and
implementing TCP/IP on those is a bit overkill and difficult (not
It looked like xAP is exactly what I want. I will dive into the
specifications and try to find its pros and cons.
Please don't send me Word or PowerPoint attachments. See
Join the FSF as an Associate Member at:
More information about the community