MQTT Integration (client certificate)

Why i have do generate Certificates if i won´t connect via integrations to MQTT?
How can i generate these certicicate? Current i get this message: “no ca certificate or ca key configured (code: 2)”

Current i do the integration over the application configuration. I receive message over MQTT, but i won´t send also pack messages.

Can anyone help?

If you are not using the MQTT integration, then there is no need to generate a client certificate. That feature is there to facilitate the generation of these certificates, but it is not mandatory to do so :slight_smile:

Hi @brocaar. What @TheDarkBlueEvil mentioned is maybe something to consider as a new integration type. We had some use cases where we needed to send the mqtt data to another mqtt broker. We solved it using nodered, but is not straight forward. If it’s ok, I could create a feature request for that…

Please note that for now I would like to keep application integrations “fire and forget” (current application integrations are all HTTP POST based).

For your use-case, wouldn’t setting up a bridge be easier between your and the external MQTT broker? E.g. you could configure Mosquitto to configure all messages on a specific topic(prefix) to forward to an external MQTT broker.

Yes, definitely. I thought it would be just convenient if a user could to that, without having an chirpstack administrator to setup a mqtt bridge.

The issue (or complexity) is that this could result in many MQTT connections. Example:

You have 10 servers, each running an AS instance.
You have 10 applications with a custom MQTT integration.

That means that the AS needs to connect to 10 external MQTT brokers. However, since you don’t know which AS instance will handle the uplink (and forward the uplink to the integration), each AS instance must connect to each MQTT broker, meaning the number of total outgoing connections is num AS instances x num MQTT integrations.

An other way would be to re-connect to the MQTT broker for each uplink, but I expect that this would cause quite some overhead.

Ideas are welcome :slight_smile: