Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
On Thu, 16 Jun 2016 11:40:13 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > 2016-06-09 1:29 GMT+02:00 Martine Lenders : > > > Hi, > > > > 2016-06-08 20:29 GMT+02:00 Iván Briano : > > > >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 19:58:50 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > >> > 2016-06-08 17:14 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli < > >> emmanuel.bacce...@inria.fr>: > >> > > >> > > Hi Ivan, > >> > > it would be great to have it as a pkg indeed! > >> > > That's the standard way third-party stacks are integrated in RIOT. > >> > > Looking forward to that, > >> > > Emmanuel > >> > > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Iván Briano > >> wrote: > >> > > > >> > >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:46:31 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > >> > >> > Thanks for your answers. > >> > >> > Could we integrate Soletta OIC implementation part as a pkg in > >> RIOT? > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> The OIC implementation is tightly integrated to the core of Soletta, > >> so > >> > >> you need the whole thing in. > >> > > > >> > > Yes but could we find a way to separate it a bit so we can run a OIC > >> > server using GNRC quickly? > >> > >> That's not straight forward. The OIC implementation uses the CoAP one in > >> Soletta, which uses the socket abstractions as well. GNRC is all the way > >> under that. Using Soletta means that you'll need one thread to run the > >> main loop, from where all events will be dispatched. > >> > > > > Do you use your own implementation of CoAP? (or microcoap or libcoap) > Soletta definies socket over RIOT socket? Why? Because Soletta is a full fledged framework, intended to provide portability across platforms and OSes, so every feature it provides is tightly integrated with the way that Soletta does things, rather than being self contained packages. At the lowest levels, there are abstractions for the target OS so the main loop works consistently across them, as well as integrating IO APIs and network to said main loop. > There is some work, we need to dig inside but I think it's a good idea to > port your OIC implementation as RIOT package, so RIOT will be an OIC > compliant OS and this is important to uniform exchanged data between > devices. There's no porting the OIC implementation alone, it's either the whole of Soletta or doing a separate OIC implementation. You are not the first to ask for this though, but I don't have anything ready for that at the moment. > Let Martine know if you need any help about the porting, you can include me > in the PR, I don't know if I'll have time to work on it, but I will follow > your porting. > I'm not so actively working on Soletta anymore, nor with OIC directly, so as time permits I can continue doing the package for Soletta, but I won't be working on an OIC-only package for RIOT any time soon. On the matter of porting, Soletta already runs on RIOT, so there's little in terms of porting that's required, but I haven't tested on a wide enough variety of boards and I ran into some issues making sure the build systems integrate smoothly, thus why it's taking so long. Also, although the idea of the framework is to abstract the underlying OS, there's technically nothing that prevents using RIOT APIs along with Soletta, it's just that hasn't been tested (or even really considered) and there is no straight forward way to have the Soletta main thread communicating with others. > > > > Porting to GNRC won't be necessary for early integration (maybe later on > > we can cherry-pick the best parts to make it work with GNRC). The emb6 > > stack (a fork of Contiki's uIP) [1] I ported for RIOT [2] had similar > > requirements for running in a single thread. If you want to I can help you > > with integrating a foreign network stack into RIOT using `pkg`. > > It's mainly about providing an adaption layer between whatever HAL the > > stack uses and `netdev2`. `conn` can also be ported, but as your > > descriptions sounds like Soletta is running above transport layer, this > > might not be needed/suitable. > > > > Cheers, > > Martine > > > > [1] https://github.com/hso-esk/emb6 > > [2] https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/tree/master/pkg/emb6 > > > > > > -- > Baptiste > ___ > devel mailing list > devel@riot-os.org > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
2016-06-09 1:29 GMT+02:00 Martine Lenders : > Hi, > > 2016-06-08 20:29 GMT+02:00 Iván Briano : > >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 19:58:50 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: >> > 2016-06-08 17:14 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli < >> emmanuel.bacce...@inria.fr>: >> > >> > > Hi Ivan, >> > > it would be great to have it as a pkg indeed! >> > > That's the standard way third-party stacks are integrated in RIOT. >> > > Looking forward to that, >> > > Emmanuel >> > > >> > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Iván Briano >> wrote: >> > > >> > >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:46:31 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: >> > >> > Thanks for your answers. >> > >> > Could we integrate Soletta OIC implementation part as a pkg in >> RIOT? >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> The OIC implementation is tightly integrated to the core of Soletta, >> so >> > >> you need the whole thing in. >> > > >> > > Yes but could we find a way to separate it a bit so we can run a OIC >> > server using GNRC quickly? >> >> That's not straight forward. The OIC implementation uses the CoAP one in >> Soletta, which uses the socket abstractions as well. GNRC is all the way >> under that. Using Soletta means that you'll need one thread to run the >> main loop, from where all events will be dispatched. >> > > Do you use your own implementation of CoAP? (or microcoap or libcoap) Soletta definies socket over RIOT socket? Why? There is some work, we need to dig inside but I think it's a good idea to port your OIC implementation as RIOT package, so RIOT will be an OIC compliant OS and this is important to uniform exchanged data between devices. Let Martine know if you need any help about the porting, you can include me in the PR, I don't know if I'll have time to work on it, but I will follow your porting. > Porting to GNRC won't be necessary for early integration (maybe later on > we can cherry-pick the best parts to make it work with GNRC). The emb6 > stack (a fork of Contiki's uIP) [1] I ported for RIOT [2] had similar > requirements for running in a single thread. If you want to I can help you > with integrating a foreign network stack into RIOT using `pkg`. > It's mainly about providing an adaption layer between whatever HAL the > stack uses and `netdev2`. `conn` can also be ported, but as your > descriptions sounds like Soletta is running above transport layer, this > might not be needed/suitable. > > Cheers, > Martine > > [1] https://github.com/hso-esk/emb6 > [2] https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/tree/master/pkg/emb6 > -- Baptiste ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hi, 2016-06-08 20:29 GMT+02:00 Iván Briano : > On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 19:58:50 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > > 2016-06-08 17:14 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli >: > > > > > Hi Ivan, > > > it would be great to have it as a pkg indeed! > > > That's the standard way third-party stacks are integrated in RIOT. > > > Looking forward to that, > > > Emmanuel > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Iván Briano > wrote: > > > > > >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:46:31 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > > >> > Thanks for your answers. > > >> > Could we integrate Soletta OIC implementation part as a pkg in RIOT? > > >> > > > >> > > >> The OIC implementation is tightly integrated to the core of Soletta, > so > > >> you need the whole thing in. > > > > > > Yes but could we find a way to separate it a bit so we can run a OIC > > server using GNRC quickly? > > That's not straight forward. The OIC implementation uses the CoAP one in > Soletta, which uses the socket abstractions as well. GNRC is all the way > under that. Using Soletta means that you'll need one thread to run the > main loop, from where all events will be dispatched. > Porting to GNRC won't be necessary for early integration (maybe later on we can cherry-pick the best parts to make it work with GNRC). The emb6 stack (a fork of Contiki's uIP) [1] I ported for RIOT [2] had similar requirements for running in a single thread. If you want to I can help you with integrating a foreign network stack into RIOT using `pkg`. It's mainly about providing an adaption layer between whatever HAL the stack uses and `netdev2`. `conn` can also be ported, but as your descriptions sounds like Soletta is running above transport layer, this might not be needed/suitable. Cheers, Martine [1] https://github.com/hso-esk/emb6 [2] https://github.com/RIOT-OS/RIOT/tree/master/pkg/emb6 ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 19:58:50 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > 2016-06-08 17:14 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli : > > > Hi Ivan, > > it would be great to have it as a pkg indeed! > > That's the standard way third-party stacks are integrated in RIOT. > > Looking forward to that, > > Emmanuel > > > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Iván Briano wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:46:31 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > >> > Thanks for your answers. > >> > Could we integrate Soletta OIC implementation part as a pkg in RIOT? > >> > > >> > >> The OIC implementation is tightly integrated to the core of Soletta, so > >> you need the whole thing in. > > > > Yes but could we find a way to separate it a bit so we can run a OIC > server using GNRC quickly? That's not straight forward. The OIC implementation uses the CoAP one in Soletta, which uses the socket abstractions as well. GNRC is all the way under that. Using Soletta means that you'll need one thread to run the main loop, from where all events will be dispatched. ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
2016-06-08 17:14 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli : > Hi Ivan, > it would be great to have it as a pkg indeed! > That's the standard way third-party stacks are integrated in RIOT. > Looking forward to that, > Emmanuel > > On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Iván Briano wrote: > >> On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:46:31 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: >> > Thanks for your answers. >> > Could we integrate Soletta OIC implementation part as a pkg in RIOT? >> > >> >> The OIC implementation is tightly integrated to the core of Soletta, so >> you need the whole thing in. > > Yes but could we find a way to separate it a bit so we can run a OIC server using GNRC quickly? I'll look into making sure the pkg and >> build are in good condition and send it as a pull request. >> > Ok thanks, let's see how we can use it with RIOT easily. > >> > 2016-06-07 12:58 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli < >> emmanuel.bacce...@inria.fr>: >> > >> > > Hi Gustavo, Hi Ivan, >> > > ok I see. thanks for your answers. >> > > That's too bad. It would have been great to gather OIC/OCF people in >> the >> > > same room with W3C, IETF and OpenThread people (who are attending the >> RIOT >> > > Summit) to discuss various IoT network stack approaches, and various >> IoT >> > > open source software approaches. Pitching Intel's approach to IoT in >> this >> > > context would also have been a good occasion, in the opinion of many >> among >> > > us. >> > > If there's anything we can do to help you or someone else from your >> > > community attend/present, let us know. >> > > Else, maybe next time. >> > > Cheers, >> > > Emmanuel >> > > >> > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Gustavo Lima Chaves < >> > > gustavo.lima.cha...@intel.com> wrote: >> > > >> > >> Hi, >> > >> >> > >> > Sorry, I was under the assumption that this had been settled in >> private >> > >> > conversations already, but now I see that's not the case (and the >> person >> > >> > involved is not even copied). >> > >> > >> > >> > Soletta has an implementation of OIC, the protocol that IoTivity >> > >> > implements, but there's nothing about AllJoyn or Thread. >> > >> > >> > >> > I'm in no position to talk about anything now, so I have to >> decline the >> > >> > invitation, but maybe some of the others listed that have been more >> > >> > involved with Soletta and OIC can respond. >> > >> > >> > >> > On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:40:34 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: >> > >> > > Could some of you answer please? >> > >> > > Thanks >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Baptiste >> > >> > > >> > >> > > 2016-05-31 17:30 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira < >> thiago.macie...@intel.com >> > >> >: >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > Hello Baptiste, Emmanuel >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > I'll let the people more familiar (in cc) with it reply. >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > On terça-feira, 31 de maio de 2016 16:05:22 BRT Emmanuel >> Baccelli >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > > > > Hi Thiago, >> > >> > > > > basically, we are interested in learning more about it. >> > >> > > > > And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a >> good >> > >> idea to >> > >> > > > > present this at the RIOT Summit [1]. >> > >> > > > > What do you think about this idea? >> > >> > > > > Best, >> > >> > > > > Emmanuel >> > >> >> > >> Oh, sorry, I was also in the private thread (was going to respond >> > >> soon, but now let's do it here). I have to say that I'm not very >> > >> comfortable to do a skype-based presentation. Given that the changes >> > >> of getting funds to travel to the summit are vague now, maybe I'll >> > >> have to decline as well, unfortunately. >> > >> >> > >> [...] >> > >> >> > >> > > > > Hi! >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste >> Clenet >> > >> wrote: >> > >> > > > > > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] >> > >> imported it >> > >> > > > > > for >> > >> > > > > > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think >> > >> Riot should >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > have an >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo >> (package) >> > >> so it >> > >> > > > will >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > be >> > >> > > > > >> > >> > > > > > better maintain. >> > >> >> > >> If all of OIC/OCF is to be supported, that's quite a bit of code and >> > >> using Soletta is a much simpler path. >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> Gustavo Lima Chaves >> > >> Intel - Open Source Technology Center >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Baptiste >> > > -- Baptiste ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hi Ivan, it would be great to have it as a pkg indeed! That's the standard way third-party stacks are integrated in RIOT. Looking forward to that, Emmanuel On Wed, Jun 8, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Iván Briano wrote: > On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:46:31 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > > Thanks for your answers. > > Could we integrate Soletta OIC implementation part as a pkg in RIOT? > > > > The OIC implementation is tightly integrated to the core of Soletta, so > you need the whole thing in. I'll look into making sure the pkg and > build are in good condition and send it as a pull request. > > > 2016-06-07 12:58 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli >: > > > > > Hi Gustavo, Hi Ivan, > > > ok I see. thanks for your answers. > > > That's too bad. It would have been great to gather OIC/OCF people in > the > > > same room with W3C, IETF and OpenThread people (who are attending the > RIOT > > > Summit) to discuss various IoT network stack approaches, and various > IoT > > > open source software approaches. Pitching Intel's approach to IoT in > this > > > context would also have been a good occasion, in the opinion of many > among > > > us. > > > If there's anything we can do to help you or someone else from your > > > community attend/present, let us know. > > > Else, maybe next time. > > > Cheers, > > > Emmanuel > > > > > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Gustavo Lima Chaves < > > > gustavo.lima.cha...@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi, > > >> > > >> > Sorry, I was under the assumption that this had been settled in > private > > >> > conversations already, but now I see that's not the case (and the > person > > >> > involved is not even copied). > > >> > > > >> > Soletta has an implementation of OIC, the protocol that IoTivity > > >> > implements, but there's nothing about AllJoyn or Thread. > > >> > > > >> > I'm in no position to talk about anything now, so I have to decline > the > > >> > invitation, but maybe some of the others listed that have been more > > >> > involved with Soletta and OIC can respond. > > >> > > > >> > On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:40:34 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > > >> > > Could some of you answer please? > > >> > > Thanks > > >> > > > > >> > > Baptiste > > >> > > > > >> > > 2016-05-31 17:30 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira < > thiago.macie...@intel.com > > >> >: > > >> > > > > >> > > > Hello Baptiste, Emmanuel > > >> > > > > > >> > > > I'll let the people more familiar (in cc) with it reply. > > >> > > > > > >> > > > On terça-feira, 31 de maio de 2016 16:05:22 BRT Emmanuel > Baccelli > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > Hi Thiago, > > >> > > > > basically, we are interested in learning more about it. > > >> > > > > And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a > good > > >> idea to > > >> > > > > present this at the RIOT Summit [1]. > > >> > > > > What do you think about this idea? > > >> > > > > Best, > > >> > > > > Emmanuel > > >> > > >> Oh, sorry, I was also in the private thread (was going to respond > > >> soon, but now let's do it here). I have to say that I'm not very > > >> comfortable to do a skype-based presentation. Given that the changes > > >> of getting funds to travel to the summit are vague now, maybe I'll > > >> have to decline as well, unfortunately. > > >> > > >> [...] > > >> > > >> > > > > Hi! > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet > > >> wrote: > > >> > > > > > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] > > >> imported it > > >> > > > > > for > > >> > > > > > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think > > >> Riot should > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > have an > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo > (package) > > >> so it > > >> > > > will > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > be > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > better maintain. > > >> > > >> If all of OIC/OCF is to be supported, that's quite a bit of code and > > >> using Soletta is a much simpler path. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> Gustavo Lima Chaves > > >> Intel - Open Source Technology Center > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Baptiste > ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
On Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:46:31 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > Thanks for your answers. > Could we integrate Soletta OIC implementation part as a pkg in RIOT? > The OIC implementation is tightly integrated to the core of Soletta, so you need the whole thing in. I'll look into making sure the pkg and build are in good condition and send it as a pull request. > 2016-06-07 12:58 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli : > > > Hi Gustavo, Hi Ivan, > > ok I see. thanks for your answers. > > That's too bad. It would have been great to gather OIC/OCF people in the > > same room with W3C, IETF and OpenThread people (who are attending the RIOT > > Summit) to discuss various IoT network stack approaches, and various IoT > > open source software approaches. Pitching Intel's approach to IoT in this > > context would also have been a good occasion, in the opinion of many among > > us. > > If there's anything we can do to help you or someone else from your > > community attend/present, let us know. > > Else, maybe next time. > > Cheers, > > Emmanuel > > > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Gustavo Lima Chaves < > > gustavo.lima.cha...@intel.com> wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> > Sorry, I was under the assumption that this had been settled in private > >> > conversations already, but now I see that's not the case (and the person > >> > involved is not even copied). > >> > > >> > Soletta has an implementation of OIC, the protocol that IoTivity > >> > implements, but there's nothing about AllJoyn or Thread. > >> > > >> > I'm in no position to talk about anything now, so I have to decline the > >> > invitation, but maybe some of the others listed that have been more > >> > involved with Soletta and OIC can respond. > >> > > >> > On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:40:34 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > >> > > Could some of you answer please? > >> > > Thanks > >> > > > >> > > Baptiste > >> > > > >> > > 2016-05-31 17:30 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira >> >: > >> > > > >> > > > Hello Baptiste, Emmanuel > >> > > > > >> > > > I'll let the people more familiar (in cc) with it reply. > >> > > > > >> > > > On terça-feira, 31 de maio de 2016 16:05:22 BRT Emmanuel Baccelli > >> wrote: > >> > > > > Hi Thiago, > >> > > > > basically, we are interested in learning more about it. > >> > > > > And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a good > >> idea to > >> > > > > present this at the RIOT Summit [1]. > >> > > > > What do you think about this idea? > >> > > > > Best, > >> > > > > Emmanuel > >> > >> Oh, sorry, I was also in the private thread (was going to respond > >> soon, but now let's do it here). I have to say that I'm not very > >> comfortable to do a skype-based presentation. Given that the changes > >> of getting funds to travel to the summit are vague now, maybe I'll > >> have to decline as well, unfortunately. > >> > >> [...] > >> > >> > > > > Hi! > >> > > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet > >> wrote: > >> > > > > > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] > >> imported it > >> > > > > > for > >> > > > > > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think > >> Riot should > >> > > > > > >> > > > > have an > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) > >> so it > >> > > > will > >> > > > > > >> > > > > be > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > better maintain. > >> > >> If all of OIC/OCF is to be supported, that's quite a bit of code and > >> using Soletta is a much simpler path. > >> > >> -- > >> Gustavo Lima Chaves > >> Intel - Open Source Technology Center > >> > > > > > > > -- > Baptiste ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Thanks for your answers. Could we integrate Soletta OIC implementation part as a pkg in RIOT? 2016-06-07 12:58 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli : > Hi Gustavo, Hi Ivan, > ok I see. thanks for your answers. > That's too bad. It would have been great to gather OIC/OCF people in the > same room with W3C, IETF and OpenThread people (who are attending the RIOT > Summit) to discuss various IoT network stack approaches, and various IoT > open source software approaches. Pitching Intel's approach to IoT in this > context would also have been a good occasion, in the opinion of many among > us. > If there's anything we can do to help you or someone else from your > community attend/present, let us know. > Else, maybe next time. > Cheers, > Emmanuel > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Gustavo Lima Chaves < > gustavo.lima.cha...@intel.com> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> > Sorry, I was under the assumption that this had been settled in private >> > conversations already, but now I see that's not the case (and the person >> > involved is not even copied). >> > >> > Soletta has an implementation of OIC, the protocol that IoTivity >> > implements, but there's nothing about AllJoyn or Thread. >> > >> > I'm in no position to talk about anything now, so I have to decline the >> > invitation, but maybe some of the others listed that have been more >> > involved with Soletta and OIC can respond. >> > >> > On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:40:34 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: >> > > Could some of you answer please? >> > > Thanks >> > > >> > > Baptiste >> > > >> > > 2016-05-31 17:30 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira > >: >> > > >> > > > Hello Baptiste, Emmanuel >> > > > >> > > > I'll let the people more familiar (in cc) with it reply. >> > > > >> > > > On terça-feira, 31 de maio de 2016 16:05:22 BRT Emmanuel Baccelli >> wrote: >> > > > > Hi Thiago, >> > > > > basically, we are interested in learning more about it. >> > > > > And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a good >> idea to >> > > > > present this at the RIOT Summit [1]. >> > > > > What do you think about this idea? >> > > > > Best, >> > > > > Emmanuel >> >> Oh, sorry, I was also in the private thread (was going to respond >> soon, but now let's do it here). I have to say that I'm not very >> comfortable to do a skype-based presentation. Given that the changes >> of getting funds to travel to the summit are vague now, maybe I'll >> have to decline as well, unfortunately. >> >> [...] >> >> > > > > Hi! >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet >> wrote: >> > > > > > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] >> imported it >> > > > > > for >> > > > > > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think >> Riot should >> > > > > >> > > > > have an >> > > > > >> > > > > > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) >> so it >> > > > will >> > > > > >> > > > > be >> > > > > >> > > > > > better maintain. >> >> If all of OIC/OCF is to be supported, that's quite a bit of code and >> using Soletta is a much simpler path. >> >> -- >> Gustavo Lima Chaves >> Intel - Open Source Technology Center >> > > -- Baptiste ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hi Gustavo, Hi Ivan, ok I see. thanks for your answers. That's too bad. It would have been great to gather OIC/OCF people in the same room with W3C, IETF and OpenThread people (who are attending the RIOT Summit) to discuss various IoT network stack approaches, and various IoT open source software approaches. Pitching Intel's approach to IoT in this context would also have been a good occasion, in the opinion of many among us. If there's anything we can do to help you or someone else from your community attend/present, let us know. Else, maybe next time. Cheers, Emmanuel On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Gustavo Lima Chaves < gustavo.lima.cha...@intel.com> wrote: > Hi, > > > Sorry, I was under the assumption that this had been settled in private > > conversations already, but now I see that's not the case (and the person > > involved is not even copied). > > > > Soletta has an implementation of OIC, the protocol that IoTivity > > implements, but there's nothing about AllJoyn or Thread. > > > > I'm in no position to talk about anything now, so I have to decline the > > invitation, but maybe some of the others listed that have been more > > involved with Soletta and OIC can respond. > > > > On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:40:34 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote: > > > Could some of you answer please? > > > Thanks > > > > > > Baptiste > > > > > > 2016-05-31 17:30 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira >: > > > > > > > Hello Baptiste, Emmanuel > > > > > > > > I'll let the people more familiar (in cc) with it reply. > > > > > > > > On terça-feira, 31 de maio de 2016 16:05:22 BRT Emmanuel Baccelli > wrote: > > > > > Hi Thiago, > > > > > basically, we are interested in learning more about it. > > > > > And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a good > idea to > > > > > present this at the RIOT Summit [1]. > > > > > What do you think about this idea? > > > > > Best, > > > > > Emmanuel > > Oh, sorry, I was also in the private thread (was going to respond > soon, but now let's do it here). I have to say that I'm not very > comfortable to do a skype-based presentation. Given that the changes > of getting funds to travel to the summit are vague now, maybe I'll > have to decline as well, unfortunately. > > [...] > > > > > > Hi! > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet > wrote: > > > > > > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] > imported it > > > > > > for > > > > > > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot > should > > > > > > > > > > have an > > > > > > > > > > > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) > so it > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > be > > > > > > > > > > > better maintain. > > If all of OIC/OCF is to be supported, that's quite a bit of code and > using Soletta is a much simpler path. > > -- > Gustavo Lima Chaves > Intel - Open Source Technology Center > ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Sorry, I was under the assumption that this had been settled in private
conversations already, but now I see that's not the case (and the person
involved is not even copied).
Soletta has an implementation of OIC, the protocol that IoTivity
implements, but there's nothing about AllJoyn or Thread.
I'm in no position to talk about anything now, so I have to decline the
invitation, but maybe some of the others listed that have been more
involved with Soletta and OIC can respond.
On Mon, 06 Jun 2016 22:40:34 +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
> Could some of you answer please?
> Thanks
>
> Baptiste
>
> 2016-05-31 17:30 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira :
>
> > Hello Baptiste, Emmanuel
> >
> > I'll let the people more familiar (in cc) with it reply.
> >
> > On terça-feira, 31 de maio de 2016 16:05:22 BRT Emmanuel Baccelli wrote:
> > > Hi Thiago,
> > > basically, we are interested in learning more about it.
> > > And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a good idea to
> > > present this at the RIOT Summit [1].
> > > What do you think about this idea?
> > > Best,
> > > Emmanuel
> > >
> > >
> > > [1] summit.riot-os.org
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Baptiste Clenet
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > Not really but I saw him answering some post on Iotivity and Soletta
> > > > project for people asking to port Iotivity to constraint object.
> > > >
> > > > Thiago, could you explain Soletta Project and the relation with OIC and
> > > > RIOT please?
> > > >
> > > > 2016-05-30 21:07 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli <
> > emmanuel.bacce...@inria.fr>:
> > > >> Hi Baptiste,
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks for the clarification.
> > > >>
> > > >> Have you already been in contact personally with Thiago?
> > > >>
> > > >> It may be interesting if they attend and/or present something on this
> > > >> topic at the upcoming RIOT Summit [1].
> > > >>
> > > >> Cheers,
> > > >>
> > > >> Emmanuel
> > > >>
> > > >> [1] summit.riot-os.org
> > > >>
> > > >> On May 30, 2016 4:19 PM, "Baptiste Clenet"
> > wrote:
> > > >>> Hi, I correct what I said, Soletta Project is not an implementation
> > of
> > > >>> Iotivity but an implementation of OIC specification (Iotivity too) so
> > > >>> Iotivity and Soletta project can communicate together since they use
> > > >>> same
> > > >>> specification.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Intel Open Source is in charge of this project and you can ask
> > > >>> thiago.macie...@intel.com for more information.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Cheers,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> 2016-05-30 10:41 GMT+02:00 Oleg Hahm :
> > > Hi!
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
> > > > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it
> > > > for
> > > > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should
> > >
> > > have an
> > >
> > > > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it
> > will
> > >
> > > be
> > >
> > > > better maintain.
> > >
> > > Very interesting and good to know. I was not aware of this project
> > (and
> > > I
> > > think most of the RIOT maintainers weren't either). And yes, for
> > > maintainability a package in RIOT might make sense. We just need a
> > > maintainer
> > > willing to do so. ;-)
> > >
> > > Baptiste, do you know the people behind Soletta?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Oleg
> > >
> > > --
> > > printk("Entering UltraSMPenguin Mode...\n");
> > >
> > > linux-2.2.16/arch/sparc64/kernel/smp.c
> > >
> > > ___
> > > devel mailing list
> > > devel@riot-os.org
> > > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> Baptiste
> > > >>>
> > > >>> ___
> > > >>> devel mailing list
> > > >>> devel@riot-os.org
> > > >>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > >>
> > > >> ___
> > > >> devel mailing list
> > > >> devel@riot-os.org
> > > >> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Baptiste
> > > >
> > > > ___
> > > > devel mailing list
> > > > devel@riot-os.org
> > > > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
> > Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
> >
> > ___
> > devel mailing list
> > devel@riot-os.org
> > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Baptiste
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Could some of you answer please?
Thanks
Baptiste
2016-05-31 17:30 GMT+02:00 Thiago Macieira :
> Hello Baptiste, Emmanuel
>
> I'll let the people more familiar (in cc) with it reply.
>
> On terça-feira, 31 de maio de 2016 16:05:22 BRT Emmanuel Baccelli wrote:
> > Hi Thiago,
> > basically, we are interested in learning more about it.
> > And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a good idea to
> > present this at the RIOT Summit [1].
> > What do you think about this idea?
> > Best,
> > Emmanuel
> >
> >
> > [1] summit.riot-os.org
> >
> > On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Baptiste Clenet
> >
> > wrote:
> > > Not really but I saw him answering some post on Iotivity and Soletta
> > > project for people asking to port Iotivity to constraint object.
> > >
> > > Thiago, could you explain Soletta Project and the relation with OIC and
> > > RIOT please?
> > >
> > > 2016-05-30 21:07 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli <
> emmanuel.bacce...@inria.fr>:
> > >> Hi Baptiste,
> > >>
> > >> Thanks for the clarification.
> > >>
> > >> Have you already been in contact personally with Thiago?
> > >>
> > >> It may be interesting if they attend and/or present something on this
> > >> topic at the upcoming RIOT Summit [1].
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >>
> > >> Emmanuel
> > >>
> > >> [1] summit.riot-os.org
> > >>
> > >> On May 30, 2016 4:19 PM, "Baptiste Clenet"
> wrote:
> > >>> Hi, I correct what I said, Soletta Project is not an implementation
> of
> > >>> Iotivity but an implementation of OIC specification (Iotivity too) so
> > >>> Iotivity and Soletta project can communicate together since they use
> > >>> same
> > >>> specification.
> > >>>
> > >>> Intel Open Source is in charge of this project and you can ask
> > >>> thiago.macie...@intel.com for more information.
> > >>>
> > >>> Cheers,
> > >>>
> > >>> 2016-05-30 10:41 GMT+02:00 Oleg Hahm :
> > Hi!
> >
> > On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
> > > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it
> > > for
> > > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should
> >
> > have an
> >
> > > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it
> will
> >
> > be
> >
> > > better maintain.
> >
> > Very interesting and good to know. I was not aware of this project
> (and
> > I
> > think most of the RIOT maintainers weren't either). And yes, for
> > maintainability a package in RIOT might make sense. We just need a
> > maintainer
> > willing to do so. ;-)
> >
> > Baptiste, do you know the people behind Soletta?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Oleg
> >
> > --
> > printk("Entering UltraSMPenguin Mode...\n");
> >
> > linux-2.2.16/arch/sparc64/kernel/smp.c
> >
> > ___
> > devel mailing list
> > devel@riot-os.org
> > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> Baptiste
> > >>>
> > >>> ___
> > >>> devel mailing list
> > >>> devel@riot-os.org
> > >>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >>
> > >> ___
> > >> devel mailing list
> > >> devel@riot-os.org
> > >> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> > >
> > > --
> > > Baptiste
> > >
> > > ___
> > > devel mailing list
> > > devel@riot-os.org
> > > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
> --
> Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
> Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> devel@riot-os.org
> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
--
Baptiste
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hello Baptiste, Emmanuel
I'll let the people more familiar (in cc) with it reply.
On terça-feira, 31 de maio de 2016 16:05:22 BRT Emmanuel Baccelli wrote:
> Hi Thiago,
> basically, we are interested in learning more about it.
> And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a good idea to
> present this at the RIOT Summit [1].
> What do you think about this idea?
> Best,
> Emmanuel
>
>
> [1] summit.riot-os.org
>
> On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Baptiste Clenet
>
> wrote:
> > Not really but I saw him answering some post on Iotivity and Soletta
> > project for people asking to port Iotivity to constraint object.
> >
> > Thiago, could you explain Soletta Project and the relation with OIC and
> > RIOT please?
> >
> > 2016-05-30 21:07 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli :
> >> Hi Baptiste,
> >>
> >> Thanks for the clarification.
> >>
> >> Have you already been in contact personally with Thiago?
> >>
> >> It may be interesting if they attend and/or present something on this
> >> topic at the upcoming RIOT Summit [1].
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >>
> >> Emmanuel
> >>
> >> [1] summit.riot-os.org
> >>
> >> On May 30, 2016 4:19 PM, "Baptiste Clenet" wrote:
> >>> Hi, I correct what I said, Soletta Project is not an implementation of
> >>> Iotivity but an implementation of OIC specification (Iotivity too) so
> >>> Iotivity and Soletta project can communicate together since they use
> >>> same
> >>> specification.
> >>>
> >>> Intel Open Source is in charge of this project and you can ask
> >>> thiago.macie...@intel.com for more information.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> 2016-05-30 10:41 GMT+02:00 Oleg Hahm :
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
> > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it
> > for
> > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should
>
> have an
>
> > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it will
>
> be
>
> > better maintain.
>
> Very interesting and good to know. I was not aware of this project (and
> I
> think most of the RIOT maintainers weren't either). And yes, for
> maintainability a package in RIOT might make sense. We just need a
> maintainer
> willing to do so. ;-)
>
> Baptiste, do you know the people behind Soletta?
>
> Cheers,
> Oleg
>
> --
> printk("Entering UltraSMPenguin Mode...\n");
>
> linux-2.2.16/arch/sparc64/kernel/smp.c
>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> devel@riot-os.org
> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Baptiste
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> devel mailing list
> >>> devel@riot-os.org
> >>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >>
> >> ___
> >> devel mailing list
> >> devel@riot-os.org
> >> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
> >
> > --
> > Baptiste
> >
> > ___
> > devel mailing list
> > devel@riot-os.org
> > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hi Thiago,
basically, we are interested in learning more about it.
And in particular, we were wondering whether it could be a good idea to
present this at the RIOT Summit [1].
What do you think about this idea?
Best,
Emmanuel
[1] summit.riot-os.org
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Baptiste Clenet
wrote:
> Not really but I saw him answering some post on Iotivity and Soletta
> project for people asking to port Iotivity to constraint object.
>
> Thiago, could you explain Soletta Project and the relation with OIC and
> RIOT please?
>
> 2016-05-30 21:07 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli :
>
>> Hi Baptiste,
>>
>> Thanks for the clarification.
>>
>> Have you already been in contact personally with Thiago?
>>
>> It may be interesting if they attend and/or present something on this
>> topic at the upcoming RIOT Summit [1].
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Emmanuel
>>
>> [1] summit.riot-os.org
>> On May 30, 2016 4:19 PM, "Baptiste Clenet" wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, I correct what I said, Soletta Project is not an implementation of
>>> Iotivity but an implementation of OIC specification (Iotivity too) so
>>> Iotivity and Soletta project can communicate together since they use same
>>> specification.
>>>
>>> Intel Open Source is in charge of this project and you can ask
>>> thiago.macie...@intel.com for more information.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> 2016-05-30 10:41 GMT+02:00 Oleg Hahm :
>>>
Hi!
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
> - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it for
> RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should
have an
> implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it will
be
> better maintain.
Very interesting and good to know. I was not aware of this project (and
I
think most of the RIOT maintainers weren't either). And yes, for
maintainability a package in RIOT might make sense. We just need a
maintainer
willing to do so. ;-)
Baptiste, do you know the people behind Soletta?
Cheers,
Oleg
--
printk("Entering UltraSMPenguin Mode...\n");
linux-2.2.16/arch/sparc64/kernel/smp.c
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Baptiste
>>>
>>> ___
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel@riot-os.org
>>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>
>>>
>> ___
>> devel mailing list
>> devel@riot-os.org
>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Baptiste
>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> devel@riot-os.org
> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Not really but I saw him answering some post on Iotivity and Soletta
project for people asking to port Iotivity to constraint object.
Thiago, could you explain Soletta Project and the relation with OIC and
RIOT please?
2016-05-30 21:07 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Baccelli :
> Hi Baptiste,
>
> Thanks for the clarification.
>
> Have you already been in contact personally with Thiago?
>
> It may be interesting if they attend and/or present something on this
> topic at the upcoming RIOT Summit [1].
>
> Cheers,
>
> Emmanuel
>
> [1] summit.riot-os.org
> On May 30, 2016 4:19 PM, "Baptiste Clenet" wrote:
>
>> Hi, I correct what I said, Soletta Project is not an implementation of
>> Iotivity but an implementation of OIC specification (Iotivity too) so
>> Iotivity and Soletta project can communicate together since they use same
>> specification.
>>
>> Intel Open Source is in charge of this project and you can ask
>> thiago.macie...@intel.com for more information.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> 2016-05-30 10:41 GMT+02:00 Oleg Hahm :
>>
>>> Hi!
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
>>> > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it for
>>> > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should
>>> have an
>>> > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it will be
>>> > better maintain.
>>>
>>> Very interesting and good to know. I was not aware of this project (and I
>>> think most of the RIOT maintainers weren't either). And yes, for
>>> maintainability a package in RIOT might make sense. We just need a
>>> maintainer
>>> willing to do so. ;-)
>>>
>>> Baptiste, do you know the people behind Soletta?
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Oleg
>>>
>>> --
>>> printk("Entering UltraSMPenguin Mode...\n");
>>> linux-2.2.16/arch/sparc64/kernel/smp.c
>>>
>>> ___
>>> devel mailing list
>>> devel@riot-os.org
>>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Baptiste
>>
>> ___
>> devel mailing list
>> devel@riot-os.org
>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> devel@riot-os.org
> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
--
Baptiste
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hi Baptiste,
Thanks for the clarification.
Have you already been in contact personally with Thiago?
It may be interesting if they attend and/or present something on this topic
at the upcoming RIOT Summit [1].
Cheers,
Emmanuel
[1] summit.riot-os.org
On May 30, 2016 4:19 PM, "Baptiste Clenet" wrote:
> Hi, I correct what I said, Soletta Project is not an implementation of
> Iotivity but an implementation of OIC specification (Iotivity too) so
> Iotivity and Soletta project can communicate together since they use same
> specification.
>
> Intel Open Source is in charge of this project and you can ask
> thiago.macie...@intel.com for more information.
>
> Cheers,
>
> 2016-05-30 10:41 GMT+02:00 Oleg Hahm :
>
>> Hi!
>>
>> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
>> > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it for
>> > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should have
>> an
>> > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it will be
>> > better maintain.
>>
>> Very interesting and good to know. I was not aware of this project (and I
>> think most of the RIOT maintainers weren't either). And yes, for
>> maintainability a package in RIOT might make sense. We just need a
>> maintainer
>> willing to do so. ;-)
>>
>> Baptiste, do you know the people behind Soletta?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Oleg
>>
>> --
>> printk("Entering UltraSMPenguin Mode...\n");
>> linux-2.2.16/arch/sparc64/kernel/smp.c
>>
>> ___
>> devel mailing list
>> devel@riot-os.org
>> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Baptiste
>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> devel@riot-os.org
> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hi, I correct what I said, Soletta Project is not an implementation of
Iotivity but an implementation of OIC specification (Iotivity too) so
Iotivity and Soletta project can communicate together since they use same
specification.
Intel Open Source is in charge of this project and you can ask
thiago.macie...@intel.com for more information.
Cheers,
2016-05-30 10:41 GMT+02:00 Oleg Hahm :
> Hi!
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
> > - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it for
> > RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should have
> an
> > implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it will be
> > better maintain.
>
> Very interesting and good to know. I was not aware of this project (and I
> think most of the RIOT maintainers weren't either). And yes, for
> maintainability a package in RIOT might make sense. We just need a
> maintainer
> willing to do so. ;-)
>
> Baptiste, do you know the people behind Soletta?
>
> Cheers,
> Oleg
>
> --
> printk("Entering UltraSMPenguin Mode...\n");
> linux-2.2.16/arch/sparc64/kernel/smp.c
>
> ___
> devel mailing list
> devel@riot-os.org
> https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
>
--
Baptiste
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hi!
On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 09:16:17AM +0200, Baptiste Clenet wrote:
> - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it for
> RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should have an
> implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it will be
> better maintain.
Very interesting and good to know. I was not aware of this project (and I
think most of the RIOT maintainers weren't either). And yes, for
maintainability a package in RIOT might make sense. We just need a maintainer
willing to do so. ;-)
Baptiste, do you know the people behind Soletta?
Cheers,
Oleg
--
printk("Entering UltraSMPenguin Mode...\n");
linux-2.2.16/arch/sparc64/kernel/smp.c
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
___
devel mailing list
devel@riot-os.org
https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Hi, 2016-05-30 9:16 GMT+02:00 Baptiste Clenet : > > - Thread is not high level, it is a network stack based on 6Lowpan and > CoAP. You could add Iotivity in top of Thread for instance. Nevertheless, > it would be great to use Thread on RIOT! By the way, Nest has just released > open source version of Thread weeks ago called openthread [2]. You could > try to add it to RIOT? > As far as I know, Jose (jiala...@uc.cl; @jia200x on GitHub) is planning to port openthread for RIOT. Please coordinate yourself with him, before starting something yourself. Cheers, Martine ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Re: [riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
What I can answer from my point of view: - Iotivity would be great in RIOT, Soletta project [1] imported it for RIOT, I haven't tried it but it seems to work. I think Riot should have an implementation of Iotivity directly in its repo (package) so it will be better maintain. - AllJoyn, I haven't heard about a port to RIOT but is big and I would better in Iotivity - Thread is not high level, it is a network stack based on 6Lowpan and CoAP. You could add Iotivity in top of Thread for instance. Nevertheless, it would be great to use Thread on RIOT! By the way, Nest has just released open source version of Thread weeks ago called openthread [2]. You could try to add it to RIOT? [1]https://github.com/solettaproject/soletta [2] https://github.com/openthread/openthread 2016-05-27 10:13 GMT+02:00 MATTIA ANTONINI < mattia.antoni...@studenti.unipr.it>: > Dear RIOTers , > I'm a MSc student and I'm working on RIOT for my thesis. I ask you what is > the future of RIOT in term of high level protocol like IoTivity, AllJoyn > and Thread. Is anyone writing a porting of these protocols or is anything > planned? or, which is the most suitable high level protocol for RIOT? I > found a thread in this mailing list about this topic, but it is quite old > and I think something is changed. > I hope I explained myself well. > Regards, > Mattia Antonini > > ___ > devel mailing list > devel@riot-os.org > https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel > > -- Baptiste ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
[riot-devel] RIOT Vs Iotivity, AllJoyn, Thread
Dear RIOTers , I'm a MSc student and I'm working on RIOT for my thesis. I ask you what is the future of RIOT in term of high level protocol like IoTivity, AllJoyn and Thread. Is anyone writing a porting of these protocols or is anything planned? or, which is the most suitable high level protocol for RIOT? I found a thread in this mailing list about this topic, but it is quite old and I think something is changed. I hope I explained myself well. Regards, Mattia Antonini ___ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
