Different between BLE_UUID_TYPE_BLE and BLE_UUID_TYPE_VENDOR_BEGIN

RE: Different between BLE_UUID_TYPE_BLE and BLE_UUID_TYPE_VENDOR_BEGIN

bjorn-spockeli — Mon, 05 Aug 2019 08:24:24 GMT

Geass77: If you cannot fit all the information in the Advertisment packet(31 bytes), then you can put additional information in the scan response packet ( 31 bytes). You can put the 128bit UUID in the advertisment packet and the full device name in the scan response packet, this answer provides some useful links and this this thread has a great discussion on the use of device names

Best regards

Bjørn

RE: Different between BLE_UUID_TYPE_BLE and BLE_UUID_TYPE_VENDOR_BEGIN

Geass77 — Mon, 05 Aug 2019 02:11:58 GMT

Thank you ,so how can I fix the memory problem when I use my own UUID(128 bit)

RE: Different between BLE_UUID_TYPE_BLE and BLE_UUID_TYPE_VENDOR_BEGIN

bjorn-spockeli — Fri, 02 Aug 2019 12:10:52 GMT

BLE_UUID_TYPE_BLE means that the a 16-bit Bluetooth SIG UUID is used. BLE_UUID_TYPE_VENDOR_BEGIN means that a 128-bit Vendor specific UUID(i.e. custom) is used.

See ble_types.h or the S140 SoftDevice v6.1.1: Types of UUID in the Infocenter

/** @defgroup BLE_UUID_TYPES Types of UUID
 * @{ */
#define BLE_UUID_TYPE_UNKNOWN       0x00 /**< Invalid UUID type. */
#define BLE_UUID_TYPE_BLE           0x01 /**< Bluetooth SIG UUID (16-bit). */
#define BLE_UUID_TYPE_VENDOR_BEGIN  0x02 /**< Vendor UUID types start at this index (128-bit). */
/** @} */

So if you are placing the service UUID in the advertisment packet, then a 128-bit will take up more space than a 16-bit UUID. The device name will be truncated if there is not enough room in the advertisment packet.

Best regards

Bjørn