Henning Rogge

Some kind of timeout would be fine as a workaround for 26 too... keep the tasks active for some seconds, then stop them. Would it be possible to add an...

Okay, I tried the following code ``` future_response = context.request(request).response try: response = await asyncio.wait_for(future_response, timeout=2) print('Result: %s\n%r'%(response.code, response.payload)) except asyncio.TimeoutError: return ``` but I still get one error that...

I got it working with the following change: ``` diff --git a/aiocoap/protocol.py b/aiocoap/protocol.py index 7547497..8c739b4 100644 --- a/aiocoap/protocol.py +++ b/aiocoap/protocol.py @@ -594,10 +594,16 @@ class Request(interfaces.Request, BaseUnicastRequest): else: self.observation =...

Please make this "burst mode" optional or at least configurable... depending on the "upper layer" protocol the application might just not care if some transmissions are lost, especially in the...

Any news on this? I am starting my work on COAP again and I really need the no-response mechanism. Using COAP is much better than building your own protocol over...

That sounds great... I will continue to work on my aiocoap code and come back if I verified that the current master works for me.

I just finished some testing and have still trouble with the client sending a non-response message. This is the debug output of the client: DEBUG:coap:Sending request - Token: 8dde, Remote:...

I just updated to commit 9b249a22cb3b7316dfa7ebb32bafd2dc873df61a (from yesterday), but the problem is still there. From what I see the function _response_cancellation_handler() (protocol.py, line 603) is never called when my program...

At the moment my test-code in the client sends a single message and then the client program ends... no second transmission at all. ``` request = aiocoap.Message(code=aiocoap.POST, mtype=aiocoap.NON, no_response=26, payload=cbor_payload,...

I think I found a solution by adding a (fixed) timeout to the handling of plumbing events for no-response messages. see #190