[Standards] Status of XEP-xxxx: Sensor-over-XMPP

mat henshall mat at squareconnect.com
Mon Dec 17 16:16:02 UTC 2012


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 at 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 at 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
cell: 650.814.7585
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.jabber.org/pipermail/standards/attachments/20121217/318174eb/attachment.html>


More information about the Standards mailing list