WG Core 2025-11-18

[emiltin]

Participants

Marek Zukal
Marc Le Douarain
David Otterdahl
Emil Tin

PR on support for multiple SXLs

We're working on support for modules (several SXLs) at rsmp-nordic/rsmp_core#256
This is a significant PR that covers several closely linked topics:

• multiple SXLs
• Component types, and how they're defined in SXLs
• component type ids and component ids and how the relate to multiple SXLs
• new ComponentList message
• update to the Version message and the connection sequence

Component IDs

Can be generic in core, but we must be specific in SXLs
Format A and B naming, maybe: Nordic / Universal
Do we need to support Nordic IDs in core 3.3.0? Yes, because

• a lot of existing equipment use the Nordic format. If we drop support for that in 3.3.0 it means you have to change the component ids if you want to upgrade to core 3.3.0, which can be a roadblock.
• support both formats make migration much easier, and as can upgrade core version on all equipment, and then migrate component ids gradually, or just use them for new equipment

Version message

When the initial Version request is send, the core version has not been negotiated, so it's important that the format is very stable. We can add attributes, not not remove or change existing once.
But when the Version response from the supervisor is sent, the version has been determined, so we can change the format of that response if needed.

Should supervisors have an ID, and return that in the Version response?
There's an existing issue rsmp-nordic/rsmp_core#41