On Friday 09 October 2015 17:49:14 Drasko DRASKOVIC wrote: > > You've placed a requirement on people upgrading their routers before they > > can remote-access their internal IoT networks. While I do agree that in > > the long- run, the routers will be able to do the work for us, in the > > short term that is not the case. You cannot require an upgrade of the > > device. > > Routers will have to be upgraded anyway! How else do you plan to > install Iotivity SW on them? I see it like this: it will either be ISP > providers who will shoot the FW update on the routers, but more > probably I see it as device monifactuters who will sell new "Iotivity > compliant" home gateways.
We will not update the routers, at least not now. That might happen in the future as a side-effect of OIC becoming the dominant solution for local-network IoT. When that happens, the gateway may be able to intermediate OIC connections in a better way. But until that happens, we need to work with existing routers. > > We disagree here. It's a lot easier to install an XMPP server in a cloud > > provider than it is to fix home routers/gateways. And we know of XMPP > > servers that will handle the load. > > This is not what I was thinking about. You can add MQTT or CoAP or > whatever SW support to any already existing GW by issuing FW update. I > do not understand how you can add Iotivity support to a current home > router without changing it. And most probably these GWs will have a FW > components in which cloud services provider will write at least his > URL, so that the Iotivity can reach it... Maybe this can be even > selectable on the ruoter by a user himself - but you must install some > SW on the existing router (who does not know anything about Iotivity) > itself. I completely disagree. Yes, you and I can replace the firmware in our routers -- I use OpenWRT and I've recently upgraded to Chaos Calmer. Most users will not ever do anything more than click the "check for updates" in their default firmware and even then, the majority of users will not upgrade their router firmwares at all. That's the situation we have to live with. We cannot require updates to the firmware. So installing software in your cloud (servers you do control) is comparatively a lot easier. > > Besides, this has nothing to do with IoT. Support of the IoT protocols > > will be important in the future, but we need a solution right now that > > works.> > >> Now, I know that all these clouds are made for centralized model, > >> where nodes connect directly to the cloud. But I would prosume that it > >> would be much bigger effort for any of these companies to add XMPP > >> support to their structures than to re-use already running servers. > > > > I really don't think it is. See above: installing software in a server is > > a > > lot easier than fixing the routers. > > Not sure... I am talking about big cloud multi-user systems to which > you want to add an additional protocol.... maybe i am wrong. I am not. I am talking about a simple service that relays communication from A to B. You can easily buy storage and processing power in a cloud and install your service there. -- Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
