Hi Antony
Used some time to read and watch "your tutorial for getting up and running with our tools:
http://sensor.andrew.cmu.edu:9000/raw-attachment/wiki/quick-start/sensor-an…"
Interesting.
Noticed that you are using strophe.im libs and I guess ejabberd as jabber server?
After watching your video I called some colleagues running research projects in e-maintance including remote surveillance and diagnostic in machines.
Will read your report "Sensor Andrew: Large-Scale Campus-Wide Sensing and Actuation" this evening and if possible can I come back with some questions?
Yours Sincerely
Sven-Erik Tiberg
Lulea Univ of Technology.
Sweden
From: standards-bounces(a)xmpp.org [mailto:standards-bounces@xmpp.org] On Behalf Of Peter Waher
Sent: den 17 december 2012 20:22
To: XMPP Standards; mat henshall
Cc: gauravbhatia(a)cmu.edu; iot(a)xmpp.org; Joachim Lindborg (joachim.lindborg(a)sust.se); marioberges(a)cmu.edu
Subject: Re: [Standards] Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP
Hello Anthony.
Great to hear from you. I'm sorry I didn't know of your XEP until now.
Our implementations has been one of transport mainly, only the advantages of XMPP transport, including client authentication, and network topology independence. We've left most of meter/sensor communication to the protocol transported on-top (being it M-bus, Modbus, etc.), with payload being identified using a content type attribute. Our desire is to create a better abstract interface which is protocol independent, which would allow for the same things. (And we have such an abstraction already defined for other purposes, but it is not used in our xmpp implementation, so we have some ideas on what we would need in a new XEP.)
However, we don't see it as necessarily advantageous to start specifying interfaces for different kinds of devices in the XEP. We believe this is a bad abstraction. (Something outside of the interfaces defined, would not be valid until one updates the XEP.) However, an interoperability section online would probably be required, for people wanting to define specific interfaces for certain use cases.
We don't either see a difference between sensors and a actuators in how devices are handled, they are examples of two extremes of the same abstraction: To us most devices consists of a collection of both readable values (i.e. "sensor" values, but also other kind of non-sensor values) and writable values (configurable values, output values, etc.). A PLC is an example where you cannot simply say it's a sensor (it may have sensing capacities and most probably will) or an actuator (it most probably has output values, but might not use them).
This we want to include in a XEP (and if previous XEPs could/should/shouldn't be used and why):
* Abstract interface description, describing available sensor resources (readable/writable values, data types, meta information, etc.)
* Request/response mechanism for readout.
* Request/response mechanism for output.
* Spontaneous reporting of momentary values based on subscription rules, hysteresis levels, and/or other logic.
* Node topology information (if sensor part of larger whole, like a concentrator, for instance).
* Abstract metering data description, including:
o Timestamps
o Description
o Units (if numerical)
o Precision (if numerical)
o Statuses (sequence of flags: error, QoS, tampering, etc.)
o Data types (numerical, Boolean, string, date & time, enum, time span)
o Value Types (momentary values, historical values, status values, informative values, etc.)
o Localization information
We also want to include several other things in a separate xep (like control logic), based on what's possible if XMPP is connected to a semantic web environment.
Would anybody be interested in working on such a XEP with us?
Sincerely,
Peter Waher
From: Anthony Rowe [mailto:agr@ece.cmu.edu]<mailto:[mailto:agr@ece.cmu.edu]>
Sent: den 17 december 2012 13:45
To: mat henshall
Cc: gauravbhatia(a)cmu.edu<mailto:gauravbhatia@cmu.edu>; iot(a)xmpp.org<mailto:iot@xmpp.org>; Joachim Lindborg (joachim.lindborg(a)sust.se<mailto:joachim.lindborg@sust.se>); XMPP Standards; marioberges(a)cmu.edu<mailto:marioberges@cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: [Standards] Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP
Hi all,
Great to see so much interested in XMPP for IoT applications. The XEP was basically a summarization of how we had been using XMPP and pubsub in our sensor andrew project. We were also lucky enough to get a fair amount of input form Charles at Google with some interesting use-cases and a few idea on reducing message traffic. The main hangup was that the XMPP council didn't like the idea of linking sensors and actuators and there was some concern if pubsub was generally a good fit for actuation. We basically decided that as researchers in a University environment we would just keep doing what we were doing and revisit the XEP in the future if there was more interest. One easy fix would have been for us to split the XEP into a sensor and actuator document.
I would be very interested to hear about how you all have been structuring your XMPP communication. Is it similar to what we proposed? Is anyone using pubsub? We are still actively using our proposed model with a few minor changes to the XEP. Our most recent version of the XEP document can be found here:
http://sensor.andrew.cmu.edu/xep/sox-xep.html
We also have a simple tutorial for getting up and running with our tools:
http://sensor.andrew.cmu.edu:9000/raw-attachment/wiki/quick-start/sensor-an…
As for implementations, we have a C, java and python version of our library (called SOX) that we have continued to develop. We have been focusing our recent efforts on the slightly higher-level problems associated with data storage, meta information management and application hosting. These all for the most part exist above the XEP which is just our simple message passing format.
I wouldn't be opposed to revamping our XEP with other's inputs and trying to resubmit. We have been getting interest from our corporate sponsors to take another shot at the XEP.
-Anthony
On Dec 17, 2012, at 11:16 AM, mat henshall <mat(a)squareconnect.com<mailto:mat@squareconnect.com>> wrote:
We are using XMPP for both sensor reporting and control for building and home automation applications. We have implemented a very rich set of stanza's that cover almost all common types of devices and it is designed to work on very low resource embedded devices. This implementation is currently in closed beta although there are some very large brands who have started to develop applications and hardware using our protocol and technology. Our intention is to make the protocol public once we had a full working public available implementation.
When we became aware of the proposed XEP extension mentioned here we were already a long way down the road with our own, and as there is so much more to making a complete system than is exposed in this XEP, we felt we needed a working implementation to compare and contrast and make meaningful contributions based on experience...
We would be excited to work with others on creating a standard... the problem as always is time to commit to this exercise. That being said, we do have executing code and multiple devices talking to each otehr across continents... so I think we are at the stage where we could add to any serious attempt for standardization.
Mat
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig(a)gmx.net<mailto:hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>> wrote:
Hi all,
I was actually wondering myself about the status of XMPP & SIP usage for sensors. I dropped Peter a mail a month ago to hear more about the deployment situation.
It seems that if there are implementations then they are using HTTP.
Ciao
Hannes
On Dec 17, 2012, at 5:47 PM, Matthew Wild wrote:
> On 17 December 2012 12:35, Peter Waher <Peter.Waher(a)clayster.com<mailto:Peter.Waher@clayster.com>> wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm writing to you to, to ask about the status of the following document:
>>
>> http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/sensors.html
>>
>
>> I'm interested in developing extensions for allowing sensor data communication and IoT, among other things. We have multiple applications using XMPP and sensors. Before proposing an extension by ourselves, I've been waiting to find colleagues working in the same area, so we could propose an extension together, this increasing the probability for it to become useful.
>>
>> What is the status of the above mentioned document? Is it set in stone, or is it possible to work on it, redefine parts of it, etc., in order for it to become more general and suitable also to our needs? Are you able to invite other authors to partake in the development of this proposed extension?
>
> It was rejected by the council at its meeting 2011-04-27:
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/council/2011-May/003164.html
>
> Nathan posted his reasoning here:
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2011-May/024545.html - and
> the discussion continued here:
> http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/2011-May/024547.html
>
> No new version was submitted as far as I know, and I know of no public
> implementations of the protocol (that's not to say there aren't any of
> course...).
>
> Regards,
> Matthew
--
Mat Henshall
Founder and CEO, Square Connect, Inc.
San Jose, CA
www.squareconnect.com<http://www.squareconnect.com/>
cell: 650.814.7585
Hello.
I'm writing to you to, to ask about the status of the following document:
http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/sensors.html
How is this proposed extension used today, and in what implementations?
I'm interested in developing extensions for allowing sensor data communication and IoT, among other things. We have multiple applications using XMPP and sensors. Before proposing an extension by ourselves, I've been waiting to find colleagues working in the same area, so we could propose an extension together, this increasing the probability for it to become useful.
What is the status of the above mentioned document? Is it set in stone, or is it possible to work on it, redefine parts of it, etc., in order for it to become more general and suitable also to our needs? Are you able to invite other authors to partake in the development of this proposed extension?
Sincerely,
Peter Waher
Peter Waher, Gerente General
[cid:image001.png@01CDDC39.8577CD00]
Clayster Chile Ltda
Calle Blanco 1623, oficina 1402
Valparaíso, Chile
Teléfono: +56-32-2122533, +56-9-71993640
Skype: peter.waher
Correo electrónico: peter.waher(a)clayster.com<mailto:peter.waher@clayster.com>
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ClaysterLabs, https://twitter.com/PeterWaher
LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/pub/peter-waher/1a/71b/a29
La información contenida en esta transmisión es confidencial y propietaria y no puede ser utilizada por personas distintas a su(s) destinatario(s). La utilización no autorizada de la información contenida en este correo por cualquier forma puede ser sancionada criminalmente de conformidad con la Ley Chilena e infringir normas sobre propiedad intelectual, propiedad industrial o secretos comerciales. Si ha recibido esta transmisión por error, por favor destrúyala y notifique al remitente telefónicamente, con cobro revertido o vía e-mail. Atendido que no existe certidumbre que el presente mensaje no será modificado como resultado de su transmisión por correo electrónico CLAYSTER Laboratorios Chile Limitada, no será responsable si el contenido del mismo ha sido modificado. Visite nuestra página WEB www.clayster.com<http://www.clayster.com/>.
The information contained in this transmission is confidential and proprietary and it cannot be used by any person other than its addressee(s). Unauthorized use of the information contained in this transmission in any form may be punished under Chilean Law and be considered a copyright, industrial property or trade secrets infringement. If received in error, please destroy it and notify the sender by calling collect or e-mail. As there can be no certainty that this message will not be modified as a result of its transmission via e-mail, CLAYSTER Laboratorios Chile Limitada shall not be responsible if the content of the same has been modified. Visit www.clayster.com<http://www.clayster.com/>.
Mat and Peter,
The announcement just went out for the meeting on January 11, 2013.
Please drop me a message with IEEE P21451-1-4 in subject line. Regards,
W.J.MILLER, PRESIDENT, MaCT, (301) 500-9277
-----Original Message-----
From: iot-bounces(a)xmpp.org [mailto:iot-bounces@xmpp.org] On Behalf Of
iot-request(a)xmpp.org
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 5:12 AM
To: iot(a)xmpp.org
Subject: IOT Digest, Vol 7, Issue 4
Send IOT mailing list submissions to
iot(a)xmpp.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/iot
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
iot-request(a)xmpp.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
iot-owner(a)xmpp.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of IOT digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: XEP-xxxx and ISO/IEC/IEEE 21451-1-4 (12-17-12) (Peter Waher)
2. Call for Participation - IEEE P1451.1.4(tm) Working Group
(William Miller)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 19:25:33 +0000
From: Peter Waher <Peter.Waher(a)clayster.com>
To: XMPP in the Internet of Things <iot(a)xmpp.org>
Subject: Re: [IOT] XEP-xxxx and ISO/IEC/IEEE 21451-1-4 (12-17-12)
Message-ID:
<1693EFE1FD641C42A0D542FCBC732DE698BC9589(a)EX3.YODA.UTOPIA.LOCAL>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Hello W.J. Miller.
You've mentioned that you do work on this in these communities, and also
promised to invite us in a meeting where you would publish technical
documentation on how you think this should be done. Any more information on
when this meeting is to take place. I e-mailed you my interest, but have not
received an invitation yet.
Sincerely,
Peter Waher
-----Original Message-----
From: William Miller [mailto:mact-usa@att.net]
Sent: den 17 december 2012 13:35
To: iot(a)xmpp.org
Subject: [IOT] XEP-xxxx and ISO/IEC/IEEE 21451-1-4 (12-17-12)
Mat and Peter,
There is a join standardization effort in ISO/IEC/iEEE 21451-1-4 and we will
incorporate aspects of XEP-XXXX Sensors over XMPP and would well input from
others in the community. There is a reference model that we are using that
is powered by XMPP and also providesXMP linkage for mobility including Smart
Phones (i.e. Andorid, Apple, Microsfoot,
Blackberry). This work
is also in process within ISO JTC1 SC1 Automatic Identification, SNIT-M2M
IoT (Internet of Things), and TC 122. This work will combine asset
identification, location tracking, and sensor monitoring for a wide range of
applciations to offer a common protoocl using XMPP. If there are others who
are interested please cotnact me if you would be intrested in particiapting
in this international effort.
Regards,
W.J.MILLER, PRESIDENT, MaCT, 01 301 500-9277 ISO/IEC/IEEE 21451-1-4 WG,
Chairman
-----Original Message-----
From: iot-bounces(a)xmpp.org [mailto:iot-bounces@xmpp.org] On Behalf Of
iot-request(a)xmpp.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 1:40 PM
To: iot(a)xmpp.org
Subject: IOT Digest, Vol 7, Issue 2
Send IOT mailing list submissions to
iot(a)xmpp.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/iot
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
iot-request(a)xmpp.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
iot-owner(a)xmpp.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of IOT digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP (Peter Waher)
2. Re: [Standards] Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP
(mat henshall)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:35:36 +0000
From: Peter Waher <Peter.Waher(a)clayster.com>
To: "gauravbhatia(a)cmu.edu" <gauravbhatia(a)cmu.edu>,
"marioberges(a)cmu.edu" <marioberges(a)cmu.edu>, "agr(a)ece.cmu.edu"
<agr(a)ece.cmu.edu>, "css(a)google.com" <css(a)google.com>
Cc: "iot(a)xmpp.org" <iot(a)xmpp.org>, "Joachim Lindborg
\(joachim.lindborg(a)sust.se\)" <joachim.lindborg(a)sust.se>,
"standards(a)xmpp.org" <standards(a)xmpp.org>
Subject: [IOT] Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP
Message-ID:
<1693EFE1FD641C42A0D542FCBC732DE698BC9287(a)EX3.YODA.UTOPIA.LOCAL>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello.
I'm writing to you to, to ask about the status of the following document:
http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/sensors.html
How is this proposed extension used today, and in what implementations?
I'm interested in developing extensions for allowing sensor data
communication and IoT, among other things. We have multiple applications
using XMPP and sensors. Before proposing an extension by ourselves, I've
been waiting to find colleagues working in the same area, so we could
propose an extension together, this increasing the probability for it to
become useful.
What is the status of the above mentioned document? Is it set in stone, or
is it possible to work on it, redefine parts of it, etc., in order for it to
become more general and suitable also to our needs? Are you able to invite
other authors to partake in the development of this proposed extension?
Sincerely,
Peter Waher
Peter Waher, Gerente General
[cid:image001.png@01CDDC39.8577CD00]
Clayster Chile Ltda
Calle Blanco 1623, oficina 1402
Valpara?so, Chile
Tel?fono: +56-32-2122533, +56-9-71993640
Skype: peter.waher
Correo electr?nico:
peter.waher(a)clayster.com<mailto:peter.waher@clayster.com>
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ClaysterLabs, https://twitter.com/PeterWaher
LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/pub/peter-waher/1a/71b/a29
La informaci?n contenida en esta transmisi?n es confidencial y propietaria y
no puede ser utilizada por personas distintas a su(s) destinatario(s). La
utilizaci?n no autorizada de la informaci?n contenida en este correo por
cualquier forma puede ser sancionada criminalmente de conformidad con la Ley
Chilena e infringir normas sobre propiedad intelectual, propiedad industrial
o secretos comerciales. Si ha recibido esta transmisi?n por error, por favor
destr?yala y notifique al remitente telef?nicamente, con cobro revertido o
v?a e-mail. Atendido que no existe certidumbre que el presente mensaje no
ser? modificado como resultado de su transmisi?n por correo electr?nico
CLAYSTER Laboratorios Chile Limitada, no ser? responsable si el contenido
del mismo ha sido modificado. Visite nuestra p?gina WEB
www.clayster.com<http://www.clayster.com/>.
The information contained in this transmission is confidential and
proprietary and it cannot be used by any person other than its addressee(s).
Unauthorized use of the information contained in this transmission in any
form may be punished under Chilean Law and be considered a copyright,
industrial property or trade secrets infringement. If received in error,
please destroy it and notify the sender by calling collect or e-mail. As
there can be no certainty that this message will not be modified as a result
of its transmission via e-mail, CLAYSTER Laboratorios Chile Limitada shall
not be responsible if the content of the same has been modified. Visit
www.clayster.com<http://www.clayster.com/>.
Mat and Peter,
There is a join standardization effort in ISO/IEC/iEEE 21451-1-4 and we will
incorporate aspects of
XEP-XXXX Sensors over XMPP and would well input from others in the
community. There is a
reference model that we are using that is powered by XMPP and also
providesXMP linkage for
mobility including Smart Phones (i.e. Andorid, Apple, Microsfoot,
Blackberry). This work
is also in process within ISO JTC1 SC1 Automatic Identification, SNIT-M2M
IoT (Internet of Things),
and TC 122. This work will combine asset identification, location tracking,
and sensor monitoring
for a wide range of applciations to offer a common protoocl using XMPP. If
there are others who
are interested please cotnact me if you would be intrested in particiapting
in this international effort.
Regards,
W.J.MILLER, PRESIDENT, MaCT, 01 301 500-9277
ISO/IEC/IEEE 21451-1-4 WG, Chairman
-----Original Message-----
From: iot-bounces(a)xmpp.org [mailto:iot-bounces@xmpp.org] On Behalf Of
iot-request(a)xmpp.org
Sent: Monday, December 17, 2012 1:40 PM
To: iot(a)xmpp.org
Subject: IOT Digest, Vol 7, Issue 2
Send IOT mailing list submissions to
iot(a)xmpp.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://mail.jabber.org/mailman/listinfo/iot
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
iot-request(a)xmpp.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
iot-owner(a)xmpp.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
"Re: Contents of IOT digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP (Peter Waher)
2. Re: [Standards] Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP
(mat henshall)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 12:35:36 +0000
From: Peter Waher <Peter.Waher(a)clayster.com>
To: "gauravbhatia(a)cmu.edu" <gauravbhatia(a)cmu.edu>,
"marioberges(a)cmu.edu" <marioberges(a)cmu.edu>, "agr(a)ece.cmu.edu"
<agr(a)ece.cmu.edu>, "css(a)google.com" <css(a)google.com>
Cc: "iot(a)xmpp.org" <iot(a)xmpp.org>, "Joachim Lindborg
\(joachim.lindborg(a)sust.se\)" <joachim.lindborg(a)sust.se>,
"standards(a)xmpp.org" <standards(a)xmpp.org>
Subject: [IOT] Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP
Message-ID:
<1693EFE1FD641C42A0D542FCBC732DE698BC9287(a)EX3.YODA.UTOPIA.LOCAL>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hello.
I'm writing to you to, to ask about the status of the following document:
http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/sensors.html
How is this proposed extension used today, and in what implementations?
I'm interested in developing extensions for allowing sensor data
communication and IoT, among other things. We have multiple applications
using XMPP and sensors. Before proposing an extension by ourselves, I've
been waiting to find colleagues working in the same area, so we could
propose an extension together, this increasing the probability for it to
become useful.
What is the status of the above mentioned document? Is it set in stone, or
is it possible to work on it, redefine parts of it, etc., in order for it to
become more general and suitable also to our needs? Are you able to invite
other authors to partake in the development of this proposed extension?
Sincerely,
Peter Waher
Peter Waher, Gerente General
[cid:image001.png@01CDDC39.8577CD00]
Clayster Chile Ltda
Calle Blanco 1623, oficina 1402
Valpara?so, Chile
Tel?fono: +56-32-2122533, +56-9-71993640
Skype: peter.waher
Correo electr?nico:
peter.waher(a)clayster.com<mailto:peter.waher@clayster.com>
Twitter: https://twitter.com/ClaysterLabs, https://twitter.com/PeterWaher
LinkedIn: http://se.linkedin.com/pub/peter-waher/1a/71b/a29
La informaci?n contenida en esta transmisi?n es confidencial y propietaria y
no puede ser utilizada por personas distintas a su(s) destinatario(s). La
utilizaci?n no autorizada de la informaci?n contenida en este correo por
cualquier forma puede ser sancionada criminalmente de conformidad con la Ley
Chilena e infringir normas sobre propiedad intelectual, propiedad industrial
o secretos comerciales. Si ha recibido esta transmisi?n por error, por favor
destr?yala y notifique al remitente telef?nicamente, con cobro revertido o
v?a e-mail. Atendido que no existe certidumbre que el presente mensaje no
ser? modificado como resultado de su transmisi?n por correo electr?nico
CLAYSTER Laboratorios Chile Limitada, no ser? responsable si el contenido
del mismo ha sido modificado. Visite nuestra p?gina WEB
www.clayster.com<http://www.clayster.com/>.
The information contained in this transmission is confidential and
proprietary and it cannot be used by any person other than its addressee(s).
Unauthorized use of the information contained in this transmission in any
form may be punished under Chilean Law and be considered a copyright,
industrial property or trade secrets infringement. If received in error,
please destroy it and notify the sender by calling collect or e-mail. As
there can be no certainty that this message will not be modified as a result
of its transmission via e-mail, CLAYSTER Laboratorios Chile Limitada shall
not be responsible if the content of the same has been modified. Visit
www.clayster.com<http://www.clayster.com/>.
Hello Mat & Hannes.
Mat: Excellent to hear you're interested in this work. We too have commercial products out using XMPP, but in the field of utility metering and building control & automation. Basically, we have PLC's communicating with XMPP (as well as metering & SCADA systems doing the same on the other end). We're now pushing for the use of XMPP on the sensor level.
However, instead of trying to publish a XEP based on this work, which would be rejected since it's not generic enough to suite everybody, I'm trying to find other parties who work in this field, so we together could propose a XEP suitable for all, and hence have a better chance of being accepted by the XSF.
Hannes: I'm sorry to see I missed your mail. Could you mail me this again? (Also to peterwaher(a)hotmail.com). Perhaps it got lost in an e-mail filter, which seems to happen a lot unfortunately :(, both ways.
Regarding HTTP: We're not using HTTP a lot in our sensor communication yet, mostly in research projects. However, we're also pushing for web 3.0 technology, i.e. sensor data using semantic web technologies, which is mainly (but not necessarily) based on HTTP(S). We believe this to be the future of IoT also. If we could intermarry XMPP & web 3.0 technologies, would be great, and is one of my hopes/goals to achieve within the XSF. (However, it would require multiple XEP's.)
Sincerely,
Peter Waher
