Does anyone have experience with DPWS? I want to have my DPWS service respond to SSDP Probe requests such that it is listed in Windows Explorer (or uPnP Spy). AFAIK, DPWS doesn’t seem to respond to general Probe messages, only directed messages are honored with Probe Match responses. Is there a way to get DPWS to respond to generic Probe requests?
FYI, I have a working SSDP server implemented which ensures the device is listed in Windows Explorer, so if DPWS will not be able to help me out, I’ll merge the two and implement it myself, but that’s a lot of work
That might be the case; this is my first time using the ENC28 and I’m quite happy DPWS is working. I’m currently working on getting SSDP code ported to work in conjunction with DPWS so my devices will be listed in Windows Explorer
@ Jay Jay - I am currently implementing SSDP, my device show in Explorer as well and I’m currently implementing executing actions. I intend on sharing my code once complete; might be worthwhile combining our efforts? As I don’t see a method of responding privately, look me up in the GAL using my board alias
By the way, I might be doing something wrong (or right), but my device is running 4.2 and works just fine.
The code works to an extent on 4.2 but not quite right, for instance if your NETMF IS a controller then it will not see all the broadcasts of the other UPNP devices, and that is important if you want to establish Master slave com between all your netmf devices using upnp…
I’ve tested my code on Spider 4.1 works as expected and on Mountaineer 4.2 works but to a limit. The code compiles and deploys on Panda which is important for me as those board can play the slave on the network, but not tested since I do not have the wiznet Ethernet module, but the code has the away to limit the connection to 4 or less sockets since that is the limit on the panda
Edit: I’ve created a project on codeplex MFUPnP and in the process of finalizing the code… or should the project be named NetMFUPnP ?
I think you’re way more into uPnP then I am I have much working, but might have missed some of the relationship elements you mention. Looking forward to investigating your implementation, which I’m currently unable to find on CodePlex. If you look me up in the GAL, we can also connect internally if you’d like.
I’m currently reflecting on using my uPnP implementation to support hybrid DPWS/WCF/uPnP.