@MagKas great your sensors are working correctly.
My sketch to debug this is basically a loop that each second opens a tcp-connection to my server, sends a timestamp, and closes the connection, so not much else is involved. I think my current problem is that not all code-paths in the library calling sendPacket() correctly handles sendPacket() returning FALSE. The reason I say this is that I can see the memhandle used when calling sendPacket() increasing when FALSE is returned in some cases. Eventually the library runs out of available memhandles and my sketch stops working. (This is mostly speculations, as I haven't debugged / understood it enough yet).
Is the error return value in sendPacket() needed?
Even if the packet is sent correctly, it may be dropped by the network, thus the library still needs to handle lost packets. Knowing that a packet failed to send is just a special case of lost packets that I don't think really needs to be handled separately. @MagKas solution without the while-loop basically does this by returning OK even when the enc-chip transmit logic freezes and don't send the packet, and that appears to work. The enc-chip will always be reset before sending the next packet, so it won't hang in any strange state. (I can imagine one problem when sending large packets and re-entering sendPacket() before the previous packet has finished transmitting. I don't know if this actually happens in real life.)
Maybe @ntruchsess or anyone else can educate me as to why the return value is needed or why it is a bad idea to remove it?
