Move back "add nodes" from discovery extension to network manager

[mikomarrache]

After analyzing the code, we saw that the responsibility of adding nodes to the network manager has been left to the discovery extension.

Is there a reason for that? By definition, an extension should not be a critical module for the proper function of the library. But it seems that the library would not work without this extension.

I can see the ZigBeeNetworkDiscoverer class implements the ZigBeeAnnounceListener interface so that it can add nodes when device status becomes UNSECURED_JOIN, SECURED_REJOIN or UNSECURED_REJOIN. Why is that logic not in the ZigBeeNetworkManager.nodeStatusUpdate method?

I have the same question about reacting to DeviceAnnounce commands. The network manager could register itself as listener for DeviceAnnounce commands.

[cdjackson]

Is there a reason for that?

At the time, it was done this way so that different discovery systems could be used as I wasn't sure if the way it was being done was best in all situations.

By definition, an extension should not be a critical module for the proper function of the library.

While I agree in principal, it is a fine line. Without the OTA extension you can't do OTA - but the library will still work. It is the same here - basic functions work and if you have a different way to discover nodes or initialise the network, then the library should work.

I am not against changing some of this if you have suggestions as I do think there is room for improvement. See also #1108 which is sort of related to the DeviceAnnounce question. In general I still think that discovery is too chatty, and the issue in #1108 needs to be resolved as a child moving to a new parent will send an announce, but it may not be able to respond to commands.

So... if you have ideas, please feel free to discuss :)

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.