This library provides a resilient full duplex communication link between a WiFi connected board and a server on the wired LAN. The board may be an ESP8266, ESP32 or other target including the Pyboard D. The design is such that the code can run for indefinite periods. Temporary WiFi or server outages are tolerated without message loss.
The original project is a collaboration between Peter Hinch and Kevin Köck. This project is an extension of Kevin Köck for usage with the dynamic app server project found in micropython_iot_generic. The libraries for using an esp8266 to provide this functionality to a pyboard is not ported yet as I don't own a pyboard and can't properly test it.
The most notable difference between the original project is the different goal.
Peter Hinch wants to provide a simple interface for sending one string from one side to the other. The connection is resilient and no message (with qos) gets lost.
My goal is to provide an interface for communicating between client and server applications. The server for this can be found in micropython_iot_generic. This enables the client to use only one communication library for all kinds of communication applications so you don't need to use one library for every purpose but have a standardized communication protocol you can build custom apps upon. You can run a mqtt client app while also having a http app or an app for complex calculations or a small app for any other complex internet library running on the server. The server can easily act as a proxy for more complex libraries. Multiple libraries for resilient communication are not able to run alongside each other because they also control the wifi. Therefore one library for all use-cases is needed. Examples for this can be found in micropython_iot_generic/client/apps/mqtt.py.
Sadly I was not able to just subclass the original project without significant overhead and we had different opinions about implementing the necessary changes as many of these are not needed for the simple transmission of strings, so there is now a special client version for the usage with micropython_iot_generic.
- Multiple concurrent qos=True writes
Peter Hinch added the feature of multiple concurrent qos writes, providing a powerful and flexible library which on the other hand has many risks if not handled correctly by the user. This requires the user to know a lot about the inner workings of the library and corner-cases if he wants to use this advanced feature or he might suffer from message loss, buffer overflows and other problems. - Unneeded transmissions and processing time
Also because of a lack of a proper header, an ACK is sent for every message, even the qos=False messages that do not have message loss protection. This increases the amount of messages the client has to receive and process unnecessarily.
My client implementation is only slightly different but as my goal is to provide a safe to use library and extend its functionality, I had to make small changes:
- I removed the feature of multiple concurrent writes for qos messages. This means that one qos message is sent after the previous one received its acknowledge message, which is also the default in the upstream project. Non-qos messages are not restricted in this way.
- Without going into technical explanations the client library sends a header additionally to the user message and also optimizes RAM usage and reduces the risk for RAM fragmentation. These were also the reasons for not just subclassing the original project, it would result in a significant increase in RAM usage (especially temporary during message conversions) and fragmentation. The additional header was needed to keep the RAM overhead for supporting multiple apps on the client to a minimum.
- The message order is also ensured, even when writing from multiple coroutines.
- Because of a proper message header, acknowledge messages are only sent for qos=True messages to prevent unneeded message transmissions and processing time.
-
Client and server applications use
read
andwrite
methods to communicate when using headers andreadline
andwriteline
methods to simply write a string. Upstream only hasreadline
andwrite
for sending/receiving a string. -
The received messages are automatically converted from json which means that
read
andreadline
both return the converted object (dict, list, str) and not a string as in upstream. This is because of performance and RAM optimizations. -
To have a similar interface as the read methods, the
write
andwriteline
methods automatically convert the given object to a json string. Therefore the user application does not need to think about converting objects to and from a network compatible string.
IOT (Internet of Things) systems commonly comprise a set of endpoints on a WiFi network. Internet access is provided by an access point (AP) linked to a router. Endpoints run an internet protocol such as MQTT or HTTP and normally run continuously. They may be located in places which are hard to access: reliability is therefore paramount. Security is also a factor for endpoints exposed to the internet.
Under MicroPython the available hardware for endpoints is limited. Testing has been done on the ESP8266, ESP32 and the Pyboard D. The ESP32 must run firmware dated on or after 25th March 2019.
The ESP8266 remains as a readily available inexpensive device which, with care, is capable of long term reliable operation. It does suffer from limited resources, in particular RAM. Achieving resilient operation in the face of WiFi or server outages is not straightforward: see this document. The approach advocated here simplifies writing robust ESP8266 IOT applications by providing a communications channel with inherent resilience.
The usual arrangement for MicroPython internet access is as below.
Running internet protocols on ESP8266 nodes has the following drawbacks:
- It can be difficult to ensure resilience in the face of outages of WiFi and of the remote endpoint.
- Running TLS on the ESP8266 is demanding in terms of resources: establishing a connection can take 30s.
- There are potential security issues for internet-facing nodes.
- The security issue creates a requirement periodically to install patches to firmware or to libraries. This raises the issue of physical access.
- Internet applications can be demanding of RAM.
This document proposes an approach where multiple remote nodes communicate with a local server. This runs CPython or MicroPython code and supports the internet protocol required by the application. The server and the remote nodes communicate using a simple protocol based on the exchange of lines of text. The server can run on a Linux box such as a Raspberry Pi; this can run 24/7 at minimal running cost.
Benefits are:
- Security is handled on a device with an OS. Updates are easily accomplished.
- The text-based protocol minimises the attack surface presented by nodes.
- The protocol is resilient in the face of outages of WiFi and of the server: barring errors in the application design, crash-free 24/7 operation is a realistic prospect.
- The amount of code running on the remote is smaller than that required to run a resilient internet protocol such as this MQTT version.
- The server side application runs on a relatively powerful machine. Even minimal hardware such as a Raspberry Pi has the horsepower easily to support TLS and to maintain concurrent links to multiple client nodes. Use of threading is feasible.
- The option to use CPython on the server side enables access to the full suite of Python libraries including internet modules.
The principal drawback is that in addition to application code on the ESP8266 node, application code is also required on the PC to provide the "glue" linking the internet protocol with each of the client nodes. In many applications this code may be minimal.
There are use-cases where conectivity is entirely local, for example logging locally acquired data or using some nodes to control and monitor others. In such cases no internet protocol is required and the server side application merely passes data between nodes and/or logs data to disk.
This architecture can be extended to non-networked clients such as the Pyboard V1.x. This is described and diagrammed here.
This repo comprises code for resilent full-duplex connections between a server application and multiple clients. Each connection is like a simplified socket, but one which persists through outages and offers guaranteed message delivery.
- MicroPython IOT application design
- Contents
- Design
2.1 Protocol - Files and packages
3.1 Installation
3.2 Usage - Client side applications
4.1 The Client class
4.1.1 Initial Behaviour
4.1.2 Watchdog Timer - Server side applications
- Ensuring resilience Guidelines for application design.
- Quality of service Guaranteeing message delivery.
7.1 The qos argument - Performance
8.1 Latency and throughput
8.2 Client RAM utilisation - Extension to the Pyboard
- How it works
10.1 Interface and client module
10.2 Server module
The code is asynchronous and based on asyncio
. Client applications on the
remote import client.py
which provides the interface to the link. The server
side application uses server.py
.
Messages are required to be complete lines of text. They typically comprise an arbitrary Python object encoded using JSON. The newline character ('\n') is not allowed within a message but is optional as the final character.
Guaranteed message delivery is supported. This is described in section 7. Performance limitations are discussed in section 8.
Client and server applications use read
and write
methods to
communicate when using headers and readline
and writeline
methods to simply
write a string: in the case of an outage of WiFi or the connected endpoint, the
method will pause until the outage ends.
The link status is determined by periodic exchanges of keepalive messages. This is transparent to the application. If a keepalive is not received within a user specified timeout an outage is declared. On the client the WiFi is disconnected and a reconnection procedure is initiated. On the server the connection is closed and it awaits a new connection.
Each client has a unique ID which is an arbitrary string. In the demo programs
this is stored in local.py
. The ID enables the server application to
determine which physical client is associated with an incoming connection.
client.py
/client.mpy
Client module. The ESP8266 has insufficient RAM to compileclient.py
so the precompiledclient.mpy
should be used. See note below.__init__.py
Functions and classes common to many modules.server.py
Server module. (runs under CPython 3.5+ or MicroPython 1.10+).examples
Package of a simple example. Up to four clients communicate with a single server instance.remote
Package demonstrating using the library to enable one client to control another.qos
Package demonstrating the qos (qality of service) implementation, see Quality of service.pb_link
Package enabling a Pyboard V1.x to communicate with the server via an ESP8266 connected by I2C. See documentation. [Not ported]esp_link
Package for the ESP8266 used in the Pyboard link. [Not ported]
NOTE: The file client.mpy
requires release build V1.10 of firmware. If using
a later build, it is necessary to cross-compile with the associated version of
mpy-cross
as the mpy format has changed.
This section describes the installation of the library and the demos. The ESP8266 has limited RAM: there are a number of specific recommendations for installation on that platform.
Firmware must be V1.10 or later; on ESP32 it must be more recent, specifically builds dated 25th March 2019 or later.
On ESP8266 it is easiest to use the latest release build of firmware: such
builds incorporate uasyncio
as frozen bytecode. Daily builds do not.
Alternatively to maximise free RAM, firmware can be built from source, freezing
uasyncio
, client.py
and __init__.py
as bytecode.
Note that if uasyncio
is to be installed it should be acquired from
official micropython-lib. It
should not be installed from PyPi using upip
: the version on PyPi is
incompatible with official firmware.
On ESP8266 it is necessary to
cross compile
client.py
. The file client.mpy
is provided for those unable to do this.
The demo programs store client configuration data in a file local.py
. Each
demo has its own local.py
located in the directory of the demo code. This
contains the following constants which should be edited to match local
conditions:
MY_ID = '1' # Client-unique string.
SERVER = '192.168.0.41' # Server IP address.
SSID = 'my_ssid'
PW = 'WiFi_password'
PORT = 9999
TIMEOUT = 4000
The ESP8266 can store WiFi credentials in flash memory. If desired, ESP8266
clients can be initialised to connect to the local network prior to running
the demos. In this case the SSID and PW variables may optionally be empty
strings (SSID = ''
).
Note that the server-side examples below specify python3
in the run command.
In every case micropython
may be substituted to run under the Unix build of
MicroPython.
This repository is built to be used as a python package. This means that on the client the directory structure must be retained.
First clone the repository:
git clone https://github.com/kevinkk525/micropython-iot micropython_iot
It's important to clone it into a directory micropython_iot as Python syntax disallows names containing a "-" character.
On the client create the directory micropython_iot
in the boot device. On
ESP8266 this is /pyboard
. On the Pyboard D it will be /flash
or /sd
depending on whether an SD card is fitted. Copy the following files to it:
client.mpy
__init__.py
Note that the ESP8266 has insufficient RAM to compileclient.py
so the cross compiledclient.mpy
must be used. Clients with more RAM can accept either.
To install the demos the following directories and their contents should be
copied to the micropython_iot
directory:
qos
examples
remote
This can be done using any tool but I recommend rshell. If this is used follow these commands (amend the boot device for non-ESP8266 clients):
rshell -p /dev/ttyS3 # adapt the port to your situation
mkdir /pyboard/micropython_iot # create directory on your esp8266
cp client.mpy __init__.py /pyboard/micropython_iot/
cp -r examples /pyboard/micropython_iot/
cp -r qos /pyboard/micropython_iot/
cp -r remote /pyboard/micropython_iot/
This illustrates up to four clients communicating with the server. The demo
expects the clients to have ID's in the range 1 to 4: if using multiple clients
edit each one's local.py
accordingly.
On the server navigate to the parent directory of micropython_iot
and run:
python3 -m micropython_iot.examples.s_app_cp
or
micropython -m micropython_iot.examples.s_app_cp
On each client run:
from micropython_iot.examples import c_app
This shows one ESP8266 controlling another. The transmitter should have a pushbutton between GPIO 0 and gnd.
On the server navigate to the parent directory of micropython_iot
and run:
python3 -m micropython_iot.remote.s_comms_cp
or
micropython -m micropython_iot.remote.s_comms_cp
On the esp8266 run (on transmitter and receiver respectively):
from micropython_iot.remote import c_comms_tx
from micropython_iot.remote import c_comms_rx
This test program verifies that each message (in each direction) is received
exactly once. On the server navigate to the parent directory of
micropython_iot
and run:
python3 -m micropython_iot.qos.s_qos_cp
or
micropython -m micropython_iot.qos.s_qos_cp
On the client, after editing /pyboard/qos/local.py
, run:
from micropython_iot.qos import c_qos
If local.py
specifies an SSID, on startup the demo programs will pause
indefinitely if unable to connect to the WiFi. If SSID
is an empty string the
assumption is an ESP8266 with stored credentials; if this fails to connect an
OSError
will be thrown. An OSError
will also be thrown if initial
connectivity with the server cannot be established.
A client-side application instantiates a Client
and launches a coroutine
which awaits it. After the pause the Client
has connected to the server and
communication can begin. This is done using Client.write
and
Client.readline
methods.
Every client ha a unique ID (MY_ID
) typically stored in local.py
. The ID
comprises a string subject to the same constraint as messages:
Messages comprise a single line of text; It's only called line because of the functionality of the upstream library. In this library you can pass any type that can be converted by ujson.
A basic client-side application has this form:
import uasyncio as asyncio
from micropython_iot import client
import local # or however you configure your project
class App:
def __init__(self, loop, verbose):
self.cl = client.Client(loop, local.MY_ID, local.SERVER,
local.PORT, local.SSID, local.PW,
local.TIMEOUT, conn_cb=self.state,
verbose=verbose)
loop.create_task(self.start(loop))
async def start(self, loop):
await self.cl # Wait until client has connected to server
loop.create_task(self.reader())
loop.create_task(self.writer())
def state(self, state): # Callback for change in connection status
print("Connection state:", state)
async def reader(self):
while True:
data = await self.cl.readline() # Wait until data received
print('Got', data, 'from server app')
async def writer(self):
data = [0, 0]
count = 0
while True:
data[0] = count
count += 1
print('Sent', data, 'to server app\n')
await self.cl.write(data)
await asyncio.sleep(5)
def close(self):
self.cl.close()
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
app = App(loop, True)
try:
loop.run_forever()
finally:
app.close() # Ensure proper shutdown e.g. on ctrl-C
If an outage of server or WiFi occurs, the write
and readline
methods will
pause until connectivity has been restored. The server side API is similar.
The constructor has a substantial number of configuration options but in many cases defaults may be accepted for all but the first five.
Constructor args:
loop
The event loop.my_id
The client id.server
The server IP-Adress to connect to.port=9999
The port the server listens on.ssid=''
WiFi SSID. May be blank for ESP82666 with credentials in flash.pw=''
WiFi password.timeout=4000
Connection timeout in ms. If a connection is unresponsive for longer than this period an outage is assumed.conn_cb=None
Callback or coroutine that is called whenever the connection changes.conn_cb_args=None
Arguments that will be passed to the connected_cb callback. The callback will get these args preceeded by abool
indicating the new connection state.verbose=False
Provides optional debug output.led=None
If aPin
instance is passed it will be toggled each time a keepalive message is received. Can provide a heartbeat LED if connectivity is present. On Pyboard D aPin
orLED
instance may be passed.wdog=False
IfTrue
a watchdog timer is created with a timeout of 20s. This will reboot the board if it crashes - the assumption is that the application will be restarted viamain.py
.
Methods (asynchronous):
readline
No args. Pauses until data received. Returns a line.read
No args. Pauses until data received. Returns a header and a line/message.write
Args:header
,buf
,qos=True
.header
can be bytearray or None.buf
holds a line of text. Ifqos
is set, the system guarantees delivery. If it is False messages may (rarely) be lost in the event of an outage.__ See Quality of service.writeline
Args:buf
,qos=True
.buf
holds a line of text. Ifqos
is set, the system guarantees delivery. If it is False messages may (rarely) be lost in the event of an outage. See Quality of service.
The following asynchronous methods are described in Initial Behaviour below. In
most cases they can be ignored.
5. bad_wifi
6. bad_server
Methods (synchronous):
status
ReturnsTrue
if connectivity is present. May also be read using function call syntax (via__call__
).close
Closes the socket. Should be called in the event of an exception such as actrl-c
interrupt. Also cancels the WDT in the case of a software WDT.
Bound variable:
connects
The number of times theClient
instance has connected to WiFi. This is maintained for information only and provides some feedback on the reliability of the WiFi radio link.
The Client
class is awaitable. If
await client_instance
is issued, the coroutine will pause until connectivity is (re)established.
Applications which always await
the write
method do not need to check or
await the client status: write
will pause until it can complete. If write
is launched using create_task
it is essential to check status otherwise
during an outage unlimited numbers of coroutines will be created.
The client buffers up to 5 incoming messages. To avoid excessive queue growth applications should have a single coroutine which spends most of its time awaiting incoming data.
When an application instantiates a Client
it attemps to connect to WiFi and
then to the server. Initial connection is handled by the following Client
asynchronous bound methods:
bad_wifi
No args.bad_server
No args. Awaited if server refuses an initial connection.
Note that, once a server link has been initially established, these methods will not be called: reconnection after outages of WiFi or server are automatic.
The bad_wifi
coro attempts to connect using the WiFi credentials passed to
the constructor. This will pause until a connection has been achieved. The
bad_server
coro raises an OSError
. Behaviour of either of these may be
modified by subclassing.
Platforms other than ESP8266 launch bad_wifi
unconditionally on startup. In
the case of an ESP8266 which has WiFi credentials stored in flash it will first
attempt to connect using that data, only launching bad_wifi
if this fails in
a timeout period. This is to minimise flash wear.
This option provides a last-ditch protection mechanism to keep a client running
in the event of a crash. The ESP8266 can (rarely) crash, usually as a result of
external electrical disturbance. The WDT detects that the Client
code is no
longer running and issues a hard reset. Note that this implies a loss of
program state. It also assumes that main.py
contains a line of code which
will restart the application.
Debugging code with a WDT can be difficult because bugs or software interrupts will trigger unexpected resets. It is recommended not to enable this option until the code is stable.
On the ESP8266 the WDT uses a sofware timer: it can be cancelled which
simplifies debugging. See examples/c_app.py
for the use of the close
method
in a finally
clause.
The WDT on the Pyboard D is a hardware implementation: it cannot be cancelled.
It may be necessary to use safe boot to bypass main.py
to access the code.
Server-side applications should use the micropython_iot_generic server implementation. The server files included in this repository are just for reference and examples.
A basic server-side application has this form:
import asyncio
import json
from micropython_iot import server
import local # or however you want to configure your project
class App:
def __init__(self, loop, client_id):
self.client_id = client_id # This instance talks to this client
self.conn = None # Will be Connection instance
self.data = [0, 0, 0] # Exchange a 3-list with remote
loop.create_task(self.start(loop))
async def start(self, loop):
# await connection from the specific EP8266 client
self.conn = await server.client_conn(self.client_id)
loop.create_task(self.reader())
loop.create_task(self.writer())
async def reader(self):
while True:
# Next line will pause for client to send a message. In event of an
# outage it will pause for its duration.
line = await self.conn.readline()
self.data = json.loads(line)
print('Got', self.data, 'from remote', self.client_id)
async def writer(self):
count = 0
while True:
self.data[0] = count
count += 1
print('Sent', self.data, 'to remote', self.client_id, '\n')
await self.conn.write(json.dumps(self.data)) # May pause in event of outage
await asyncio.sleep(5)
def run():
loop = asyncio.get_event_loop()
clients = {1, 2, 3, 4}
apps = [App(loop, n) for n in clients] # Accept 4 clients with ID's 1-4
try:
loop.run_until_complete(server.run(loop, clients, False, local.PORT, local.TIMEOUT))
except KeyboardInterrupt:
print('Interrupted')
finally:
server.Connection.close_all()
if __name__ == "__main__":
run()
There are two principal ways of provoking LmacRxBlk
errors and crashes.
- Failing to close sockets when connectivity is lost.
- Feeding excessive amounts of data to a socket after connectivity is lost: this causes an overflow to an internal ESP8266 buffer.
These modules aim to address these issues transparently to application code, however it is possible to write applications which violate 2.
There is a global TIMEOUT
value defined in local.py
which should be the
same for the server and all clients. Each end of the link sends a keepalive
(KA) packet (an empty line) at a rate guaranteed to ensure that at least one KA
will be received in every TIMEOUT
period. If it is not, connectivity is
presumed lost and both ends of the interface adopt a recovery procedure.
If an application always await
s a write with qos==True
there is no risk of
Feeding excess data to a socket: this is because the coroutine does not return
until the remote endpoint has acknowledged reception.
On the other hand if multiple messages are sent within a timeout period with
qos==False
there is a risk of buffer overflow in the event of an outage.
In the presence of a stable WiFi link TCP/IP should ensure that packets sent are received intact. In the course of extensive testing with the ESP8266 we found that (very rarely) packets were lost. It is not known whether this behavior is specific to the ESP8266. Another mechanism for message loss is the case where a message is sent in the interval between an outage occurring and it being detected. This is likely to occur on all platforms.
The client and server modules avoid message loss by the use of acknowledge
packets: if a message is not acknowledged within a timeout period it is
retransmitted. This implies duplication where the acknowledge packet is lost.
Receive message de-duplication is employed to provide a guarantee that the
message will be delivered exactly once. While delivery is guaranteed,
timeliness is not. Messages are inevitably delayed for the duration of a WiFi
or server outage where the write
coroutine will pause for the duration.
Guaranteed delivery involves a tradeoff against throughput and latency.
Message integrity is determined by the qos
argument. If False
message
delivery is not guaranteed. A use-case for disabling qos
is in applications
such as remote control. If the user presses a button and nothing happens they
would simply repeat the action. Such messages are always sent immediately: the
application should limit the rate at which they can be sent, particularly on
ESP8266 clients, to avoid risk of buffer overflow.
With qos
set, the message will be delivered exactly once.
Where successive qos
messages are sent there may be a latency issue.
The transmission of a qos
message will be delayed until reception
of its predecessor's acknowledge. Consequently the write
coroutine will
pause, introducing latency. This serves two purposes. Firstly it ensures that
messages are received in the order in which they were sent (see below).
Secondly consider the case where an outage has occurred but has not yet been detected. The first message is written, but no acknowledge is received. Subsequent messages are delayed, precluding the risk of ESP8266 buffer overflows. The interface resumes operation after the outage has cleared.
While a qos
message has not received its acknowledge, qos
=False messages
are delayed to ensure that a qos
message doesn't get lost due to buffer
overflows of a high throughput of qos
=False messages.
The interface is intended to provide low latency: if a switch on one node
controls a pin on another, a reasonably quick response can be expected. The
link is not designed for high throughput because of the buffer overflow issue
discussed in section 6. This is essentially
a limitation of the ESP8266 device: more agressive use of the wait
arg may be
possible on platforms such as the Pyboard D.
In practice latency on the order of 100-200ms is normal; if an outage occurs latency will inevitably persist for the duration.
TIMEOUT
This defaults to 3s. On Client
it is a constructor argument, on the server
it is an arg to server.run
. Its value should be common to all clients and
the sever. It determines the time taken to detect an outage and the frequency
of keepalive
packets. This time was chosen on the basis of measured latency
periods on WiFi networks. It may be increased at the expense of slower outage
detection. Reducing it may result in spurious timeouts with unnecessary WiFi
reconnections.
On ESP8266 with release build V1.10 the demo reports over 13KB free. Free RAM
of 21.8KB was achieved with compiled firmware with client.py
, __init__.py
and uasyncio
frozen as bytecode.
My features are not ported to the Pyboard because I don't own any and can't test its functionality properly. The following documentation is only applicable to the original upstream project.
This extends the resilient link to MicroPython targets lacking a network interface; for example the Pyboard V1.x. Connectivity is provided by an ESP8266 running a fixed firmware build: this needs no user code.
The interface between the Pyboard and the ESP8266 uses I2C and is based on the existing I2C module.
Resilient behaviour includes automatic recovery from WiFi and server outages; also from ESP8266 crashes.
See documentation.
The client
module was designed on the expectation that client applications
will usually be simple: acquiring data from sensors and periodically sending it
to the server and/or receiving data from the server and using it to control
devices. Developers of such applications probably don't need to be concerned
with the operation of the module.
There are ways in which applications can interfere with the interface's operation either by blocking or by attempting to operate at excessive data rates. Such designs can produce an erroneous appearance of poor WiFi connectivity.
Outages are detected by a timeout of the receive tasks at either end. Each peer
sends periodic keepalive
messages consisting of a single newline character,
and each peer has a continuously running read task. If no message is received
in the timeout period (3s by default) an outage is declared.
From the client's perspective an outage may be of the WiFi or the server. In practice WiFi outages are more common: server outages on a LAN are typically caused by the developer testing new code. The client assumes a WiFi outage. It disconnects from the network for long enough to ensure that the server detects the outage. It then attempts repeatedly to reconnect. When it does so, it checks that the connection is stable for a period (it might be near the limit of WiFi range).
If this condition is met it attempts to reconnect to the server. If this
succeeds the client runs. Its status becomes True
when it first receives data
from the server.
A client or server side application which blocks or hogs processor time can
prevent the timely transmission of keepalive
messages. This will cause the
server to declare an outage: the consequence is a sequence of disconnect
and reconnect events even in the presence of a strong WiFi signal.
Server-side applications communicate via a Connection
instance. This is
unique to a client. A more detailed documentation can be found in the server
repository micropython_iot_generic.