While I can think of a few good uses for this chip I'm still not sold on
BLE being a good thing for the "Internet of Things". Historically, the
Bluetooth SIG has been less than open. Does anyone remember the SIG having
BlueZ's site (maybe it was just a mailing list) taken down back in about
2004-2005?

The IETF and by extension 15.4 may not be perfect but I'll take open
standards over ZigBee-esque quasi-proprietary protocols like Bluetooth any
day. Not to mention that BT or BLE were never intended to be used in
dynamic, self-healing, multihop, mesh configurations. Sure, it might be
possible but such a setup wasn't accounted for in the original design.

Okay, I think I'm done ranting about my distrust and dislike of the
Bluetooth SIG and its associated spec. Suffice to say, v6 over 15.4 is the
way forward, not Bluetooth, ZigBee, Ant(+), Z-Wave, or any other NDA
encumbered psudostandar.

--adam


On Sun Jan 18 2015 at 11:44:42 AM Christian Mehlis <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Am 18.01.2015 um 19:28 schrieb Arvid E. Picciani:
> > In case you missed it: Nordic demonstrated 6LoWPAN including UDP, TCP,
> > CoAP and MQTT, over... yes.. Bluetooth Low Energy. The gateway side
> > 6lowpan_control is _upstream_ in linux since a while.
> >
> > http://www.nordicsemi.com/eng/Products/Bluetooth-Smart-Bluet
> ooth-low-energy/nRF51-IoT-SDK
>
> The data sheet sounds pretty familiar to RIOTs software stack:
>
> 6lowpan, UDP, coap/mqtt
> http://www.nordicsemi.com/eng/nordic/download_resource/41599/5/50185684
>
> I'm expecting a huge amount of kickstarter/indigogo projects with *real*
> internet of things in some weeks.
>
> Forecast: The chip nrf51 will get more fans:)
> I hope Intel as a fan of bt smart will also join the 6low over ble club!
>
> Best
> Christian
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel

Reply via email to