Hi,
I am trying to make 2 mobile phones connected concurrently
to a RFCOMM server. Please note that they don't support
role switching, so as they initiate the communication, they
are always "master".
My RFCOMM server is a forking one so it can virtually
deal with concurrent clients like on TCP.
I have put lm=accept in hcid.conf
If I open a RFCOMM server on channel 14 and try to make
the 2 mobile connect to channel 14, the first is ok, the
second can't connect. I suppose that's normal, because
channel 14 "slave" is busy linux-side with the first
connection and a "slave" can deal with one connection only.
Then I've launched a second server on channel 15 (server
on channel 14 running concurrently), and i try to make
the first mobile connect to channel 14 and the second
to channel 15 : it's the same, only the first can connect.
I think I have a misunderstanding here, as i thought the
"master/slave" was per channel. Does it mean the "slave" status
is for the whole adaptor, and once a "slave" connection is
open on one channel, it can't receive other connections at all ?
Thanks a lot for your help,
Oli
Hi Olivier,
> I am trying to make 2 mobile phones connected concurrently
> to a RFCOMM server. Please note that they don't support
> role switching, so as they initiate the communication, they
> are always "master".
>
> My RFCOMM server is a forking one so it can virtually
> deal with concurrent clients like on TCP.
>
> I have put lm=accept in hcid.conf
>
> If I open a RFCOMM server on channel 14 and try to make
> the 2 mobile connect to channel 14, the first is ok, the
> second can't connect. I suppose that's normal, because
> channel 14 "slave" is busy linux-side with the first
> connection and a "slave" can deal with one connection only.
>
> Then I've launched a second server on channel 15 (server
> on channel 14 running concurrently), and i try to make
> the first mobile connect to channel 14 and the second
> to channel 15 : it's the same, only the first can connect.
>
> I think I have a misunderstanding here, as i thought the
> "master/slave" was per channel. Does it mean the "slave" status
> is for the whole adaptor, and once a "slave" connection is
> open on one channel, it can't receive other connections at all ?
the master/slave thing is per ACL connection. However there can only be
one ACL connection between two devices. Run "hcidump -X -V" and see
what's the actual error message on the HCI level.
Regards
Marcel
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel
On Friday 01 December 2006 08:22, Peter Wippich wrote:
> I think the confusion was caused by the limitations introduced with the
> device roles: master and slave. So most modern devices support the
> following:
>
> Master with up to 7 slaves.
> Master to (6 ?) slaves and Slave to 1 Master.
> Slave to 2 Masters.
...
> No, the other way round. Always try to become a master to be able to
> service additional connections and let the phone be the slave. See above
> for the reason.
Thank you for clearing this up. I don't pretend to "get it" just yet, but
thank you again for taking the time to explain it. :-)
-A.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Bluez-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bluez-devel