Let me start by stating that I am not very technical, at least not in this area, so forgive me for asking what may be a very simple question that I am about to overcomplicate. I have been looking at the CC2541 SoC as a potential component in a peripheral I am looking to produce. At this point I am still trying to educate myself on the bluetooth low energy specs to see if they will fulfill my application's pairing requirements. My "future" smartphone application is based on a key technical requirement - my BLE peripheral devices (unlimited # manufactured and distributed) can automatically pair with any bluetooth 4.0 capable smartphone that has my application installed (no user intervention upon pairing or exchange of data from peripheral to phone). The relationship is potentially short lived, and the next time the peripheral "wakes up" there may be a completely new smartphone which it pairs with next. This process could repeat itself indefinitely with new and random smartphones (assuming my app is installed). Since there will be an unknown # of peripherals and smartphones with the app installed, there is no defined list of possible "approved" devices and therefore no previous knowledge of each other. Similarly, a single smartphone with my app installed could and will likely have an indefinite amount of peripherals that it could pair with throughout the course of a day should it come within BLE proximity.
I am not as concerned with security at this point as I am just trying to see if this can even work. Once the application is installed on a BLE smartphone then I need the pairing with any of my random peripherals to be automatic. Again, no user intervention can take place at the peripheral or phone (application is running in background). From what I have read "Just Works" might be an option. I can't seem to find a similar open pairing requirement in my searches, so I wanted to open it up to the community for their experience. Is this possible with BLE and the CC2541 peripherals? Any limitations from a scale perspective with the many:many relationship?
Thanks in advance.
Brad