I understand and support the position of OASC. Going for specs that are not public and royalty-free would be against the principles and what I tell you Spanish cities were looking for when they join OASC (I can tell this as main contact point with Spanish cities joining OASC) Thanks Cathy for clarifying Juanjo from iPhone El 23 ago 2016, a las 3:42, Mulligan, Catherine E A <c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk<mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>> escribió: Hi, This would be a showstopper for OASC as it goes against the principles upon which it was founded. I am chatting to Martin later today, but this would be against what most cities signed up for in my reading. Moreover, I am concerned with breaking the rules to allow the Future Cities Catapult to participate in the way Hermann has suggested. Future Cities Catapult will need to pay ETSI fees like everyone else to become members or we run the risk of bigger problems down the line (someone will work it out). There seems to be a big misunderstanding about the Catapults – they are separate legal entities and very rarely work together. Their articles of association prohibit them being treated as the same corporate entity – so just because one has paid doesn’t mean another one can “just wear their badge”. Might seem finicky, but bending the rules for the creation of the ISG will reallllllllllllllllllly annoy the wrong people and could be used against it… Besides, if FCC wish to participate in standards, they should do it properly. Best, Cathy -- Dr Catherine Mulligan Research Fellow Associate Director, Imperial College Centre for Cryptocurrency Research and Engineering OASC Standardisation // oascities.org<http://oascities.org/> Director and Co-Founder of Contextualised // http://www.contextualised.com/ + 44 753 888 7477 c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk<mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk> From: <fiware-oasc-etsi-bounces at lists.fiware.org<mailto:fiware-oasc-etsi-bounces at lists.fiware.org>> on behalf of Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>> Date: Tuesday, 23 August 2016 at 06:31 To: Lindsay Frost <Lindsay.Frost at neclab.eu<mailto:Lindsay.Frost at neclab.eu>>, "fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org>" <fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org>> Subject: Re: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] CIM ISG ToR proposal Dear all, I believe this is could be a showstopper for Telefónica. However, we need to think more carefully about the matter. In a first approach, I see two obstacles (already mentioned in previous emails): * FIWARE NGSI specs are public and royalty-free at the moment. I doubt this is compatible with evolutions of specs that would not. * Probably more relevant, having specs that are not royalty-free means that there cannot be open source implementations of the specs, I'm afraid. Anyone that uses a software that has been released as open source would assume that they can use it for free (i.e., without paying any usage license). Therefore, if the specs includes non royalty-free material, companies releasing open source implementations of the specs would be incurring in a "fraud" (they would be licensing the implementation under a license that explains users they can use it for free when the fact is that they cannot). As a result, users of open source implementation of the specs could sue the companies releasing such open source implementations because they would be able to argue they were cheated. As you mentioned, the risk is that specifications which are currently "safe" against contamination by non royalty-free material from contributors under the umbrella of FIWARE, would not longer be safe if the CIM ISG specifies that specifications would be released under FRAND terms. This is a risk we shouldn't accept IMHO. Still I don't see why "royalty-free" is against the ETSI IPR policy. It is true that going for a "royalty-free" approach may limit the number of companies interested in contributing to the specs but ... so what? We would be just limiting participation to the ISG to companies that would accept that specs would be public and "royalty-free" but, yes, we don't want companies who would submit material that may "contaminate" the specs. It should be crystal clear for all of us that if the specs of the CIM API and CIM data information model specs weren't royalty-free, adoption by the wide community of developers and solution integrators will never fly. I'm not aware about any relevant de-facto standard API whose specs are not royalty-free. Please let me know if we are on the same page and we should reply ETSI along the lines of what I explain above. I also suggest to notify the EC because they were the first who asked for public and royalty-free specs regarding FIWARE so therefore they should get along well together with the above line of argumentation ... Cheers, -- Juanjo On 22/08/16 23:06, Lindsay Frost wrote: Dear Juanjo and all, some editing is needed in the sections changed by ETSI re voting and electing etc, however I prefer not to start until we fix the key issue re FRAND/RF. I have one summary, one question and one suggestion regarding RF: Summary If I understand the ETSI position correctly, their logic (legal constraints) are: 1. ETSI cannot restrict the rights of patent holders when contributing to ETSI standardisation activities. 2. ETSI ISGs are standardisation activities. 3. That means the ISG ToR and related agreements cannot REQUIRE "royalty free". 4. Therefore the proposed RF clauses in the scope section cannot be accepted. Question Would anyone from OASC comment about whether ETSI FRAND compared to royalty-free, if it is considered a "show stopper" in the acceptance of CIM ? From my view, bearing in mind that OMA NGSI is FRAND, and the underlying source of IoT "information" will probably be via protocols covered by FRAND (oneM2M or other), and bearing in mind that data models are apparently extremely hard to "embed" in valid patents (I never heard of any), I cannot really see the added value of declaring the CIM specifications royalty-free. Except for advertising/branding reasons of course. Am I missing something? Suggestion Trying to nevertheless consider some workaround, what about a voluntary (not mandatory) agreement of ISG CIM members & participants for "royalty free" ? Unfortunately, I can imagine the following ETSI logic would also make it unacceptable: 1. ETSI members are entitled to join and comment/contribute to ISGs. 2. Therefore ISG CIM cannot exclude members, even if the member does not sign a voluntary "royalty free" agreement. 3. Therefore specifications will inevitably be "contaminated" with potentially non-royalty-free material by new members who do not sign the voluntary agreement (for any reason, including corporate "decision latency") 4. Therefore ISG CIM can make no binding statements concerning royalty-free, only concerning FRAND best wishes Lindsay ________________________________________ Dr. Lindsay Frost, Chief Standardization Eng. frost at neclab.eu<mailto:frost at neclab.eu> Mobile +49.163.275.1734 NEC Laboratories Europe, Kurfürsten-Anlage 36, D-69115 Heidelberg, Germany. Reg. Headoffice: NEC Europe Ltd, VAT DE161569151 Athene, Odyssey Business Park, West End Road, London HA4 6QE, Reg. in England 2832014 From: fiware-oasc-etsi-bounces at lists.fiware.org<mailto:fiware-oasc-etsi-bounces at lists.fiware.org> [mailto:fiware-oasc-etsi-bounces at lists.fiware.org] On Behalf Of Hermann Brand Sent: Montag, 22. August 2016 18:46 To: Juanjo Hierro; Patrick Guillemin; David Boswarthick Cc: Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org> Subject: Re: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] CIM ISG ToR proposal Dear Juanjo, Dear all, Please find the updated ISG CIM proposal attached. The major changes compared to your last proposal are the following (there are more detailed comments in the attachment with revision marks): · Standardization activities under FRAND terms do already coexist and complement OSS initiatives under RF terms, e.g. NFV, oneM2M. FRAND applies to all ETSI standardisation activities and the ETSI Directives do not allow any deviation from the FRAND policy in ISGs. ETSI cannot restrict the rights of patent holders when contributing to ETSI standardisation activities. Therefore your proposed RF clauses in the scope section unfortunately cannot be accepted. · As already mentioned earlier, the ‘scope section’ should describe the ‘what’ , not the ‘how’. Specific solutions are not relevant whether as starting point or not at the ISG proposal stage. On the other hand it makes sense not to duplicate the work. That’s why I kept most of your proposed text for section 3.1 to describe the starting point more specifically, but integrated it into section 16 (from where parts of the text were taken anyway). 2 remarks on your proposed changes to section 3.6. · If decisions can be made in f2f meetings only (as you propose), section 3.6.3.1.2, that is voting by correspondence is not needed · The requirement of 50% attendance of virtual meetings as eligibility criterion for voting may unfairly exclude companies from decision making (many virtual meetings could be convened rather short term and it could be difficult e.g. for small companies or companies in other time zones to participate) We would like to share the clean version with Omar and Enrico on Wednesday, 24.8.2016 – of course only if you accept the attached ISG CIM proposal. Best regards, Hermann PS: for the time being I have included Catapult Satellite as founding member. Would allow delegates from Futures Cities Catapult to participate on behalf of Catapult Satellite (wearing Catapult Satellite batches). From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com] Sent: 19 August 2016 2:25 PM To: Hermann Brand <Hermann.Brand at etsi.org<mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org<mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org<mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>> Cc: Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org> Subject: Re: CIM ISG ToR proposal Hi, To avoid any issue, please drop out Catapult from the list. It seems like it is not the Catapult organization linked to Futures Cities. Regarding Imperial Collegue, I thought they were. If not, obviously cannot be listed. Best regards, -- Juanjo On 18/08/16 18:00, Hermann Brand wrote: Dear Juanjo, Dear all, Just a quick reply, the completely edited proposal document will follow by Monday at the latest. Most of your proposed changes are acceptable. Section ‘3.1 Scope’ is not the right place for IPR issues. The right place would be clause 2 in the Member Agreement (and in the Participant Agreement). However, this clause has never been modified so far, because ETSI as institute does not specify further what FRAND means for patent holders. Needs to be discussed with Christian, our legal adviser (on holidays for the time being). We tried to separate the ‘what’ from the ‘how’, in section 3.1. That’s why I moved everything solution specific to section 16. FIWARE, European Data Portal, OASC are all regarded as external initiatives/organizations from ISG CIM point of view. The rationale in section 16 is not to re-invent the wheel and reuse what makes sense (as starting point or not) and avoid duplication of work. As for the technical work in ISG CIM, once ISG CIM has been created, it makes no difference whether the starting point is specified to be FIWARE NGSI API in the scope section or not. Don’t forget, the purpose of the proposal is to create an ISG, not to specify the solution. Unnecessary questions should be avoided. The ‘founding member’ section needs to be updated. We have to identify the legal entities in our member database/member web page. Please check http://www.etsi.org/membership/current-members. ● AT 4 wireless S. A. ● Easy Global Market ● NEC? EUROPE LTD or Telecom MODUS Ltd. Or Corporation?? ● Orange (France) or Orange UK? ● Telefónica S.A. ETSI members under the category of Research Bodies (in alphabetical order): ● Futures Cities Catapult is not a member but Catapult Satellite ● iMinds VZW ● Imperial College London is not a member!! We would like to share the agreed ISG CIM proposal with Omar/Enrico on Wednesday, 24.8, in order to submit the ISG proposal to the Board for consultation one week later. We are ready for a conference call early next week if needed. Kind regards, Hermann From: Hermann Brand Sent: 17 August 2016 10:34 AM To: 'Juanjo Hierro' <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org><mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org><mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org> Cc: 'Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org>' <Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org><mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org> Subject: RE: CIM ISG ToR proposal Thank you, Juanjo and all. We’ll discuss internally and will come back to you tomorrow. Best regards, Hermann From: Juanjo Hierro [mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com] Sent: 17 August 2016 5:42 AM To: Hermann Brand <Hermann.Brand at etsi.org<mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org<mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org<mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>> Cc: Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org> Subject: CIM ISG ToR proposal Dear ETSI team, Please find attached a revised version of the ToR based on the version you previously circulated. We accepted most of the changes you introduced but decided to keep the reference to FIWARE NGSI or DCAT-AP as starting points in the description of the scope of activities. We also distinguished between physical and virtual meetings regarding description of how meetings are governed in sections and introduced some changes we hope are agreeable here and there. They are highlighted under change control. One important matter we wanted to highlight is the public and royalty-free nature of specifications produced under the umbrella of the ISG (see paragraph on section 3.1 "Scope"). This way, specifications would follow the principles of those APIs and common information models specifications that have been most widely adopted as industry standards. This is necessary to foster adoption of results of the proposed ISG in the market. On the other hand, we understand this is compatible with the ETSI IPR policy as a specific materialization of FRAND conditions. Nevertheless, we seek for your advice regarding what could be the best and more accurate wording and are open to setup a confcall if needed. Please acknowledge reception of this mail and advise about next steps. Best regards, Juanjo Hierro (on behalf of the organizations proposing the ISG) On 16/08/16 10:37, Hermann Brand wrote: Juanjo, Have I missed something or have you not yet completed your review? Best wishes Hermann From: Hermann Brand Sent: 02 August 2016 5:00 PM To: 'Juanjo Hierro' <mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>; 'franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com<mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>' <franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com><mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org><mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>; 'CARLOS RALLI UCENDO' <carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com><mailto:carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com>; 'Philippe Cousin' <philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com><mailto:philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com>; 'Ernoe Kovacs' <Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu><mailto:Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu>; 'Mulligan, Catherine E A' <c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk><mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>; 'gilles.privat at orange.com<mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com>' <gilles.privat at orange.com><mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org><mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org> Subject: RE: draft ISG CIM proposal and draft ISG Agreements Dear Juanjo, That’s fine. Best wishes, Hermann From: Juanjo Hierro [<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com] Sent: 02 August 2016 4:58 PM To: Hermann Brand <<mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>Hermann.Brand at etsi.org<mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>>; franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com<mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org<mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>>; CARLOS RALLI UCENDO <carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com<mailto:carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com>>; Philippe Cousin <philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com<mailto:philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com>>; Ernoe Kovacs <Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu<mailto:Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu>>; Mulligan, Catherine E A <<mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk<mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>>; gilles.privat at orange.com<mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org<mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>>; Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>> Subject: Re: draft ISG CIM proposal and draft ISG Agreements Dear Hermann, Thanks ... we are reviewing your comments and had scheduled an internal meeting this Friday to consolidate comments (if any). I hope that we would be able to send you something either the same Friday or Monday at the latest ... would that work? Thanks for the clarifications regarding scheduling. Cheers, -- Juanjo On 02/08/16 16:52, Hermann Brand wrote: Dear Juanjo, Dear all, Unfortunately we haven’t yet received any feedback on the revised CIM proposal. Is it acceptable? Do you have comments? Anything wrong? I would like to share it with Omar and Enrico asap. I attach it again for your convenience. I also attach the draft ISG CIM Agreements fyi. The main legal part is the same for all ISGs. Annexes 4 and 5 are copy and paste from the proposal document once it has been approved by Luis (after Board consultation). Of course also some dates have to be updated etc. (marked in yellow). As for the roadmap, please note the following: 1) Before the proposal is sent to the Board for consultation we need written commitments from the founding members, i.e. an email sent to Luis, with the official contact of your company and David, Patrick, myself in copy, Subject: expression of commitment to participate in ISG CIM saying: I confirm that ‘company name’ agrees to the Terms of Reference of ISG CIM as presented to the ETSI Board and will sign the ETSI ISG CIM Agreement for Members. 2) Once Luis has approved the creation of ISG CIM (and related documents) signed ISG CIM Member Agreements from at least 4 founding members are needed asap before sending the CL to inform the entire ETSI membership and o announce the KoM. Best regards, Hermann From: Hermann Brand Sent: 22 July 2016 6:55 PM To: 'Juanjo Hierro' <mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>; 'franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com<mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>' <franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com><mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org><mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>; 'CARLOS RALLI UCENDO' <carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com><mailto:carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com>; 'Philippe Cousin' <philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com><mailto:philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com>; 'Ernoe Kovacs' <Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu><mailto:Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu>; 'Mulligan, Catherine E A' <c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk><mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>; 'gilles.privat at orange.com<mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com>' <gilles.privat at orange.com><mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org><mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org> Subject: RE: Updated figure and question about status Dear Juanjo, Dear all, Please find the revised ISG CIM proposal attached (clean version and with revision marks). The major changes are as follows 1) 2 phases approach (informative and normative) as discussed in combined f2f/electronic meeting last week 2) Separate ‘what’ from ‘how’ in the scope description, tried to push everything solution oriented to the last section presenting it as close collaboration and reuse of what exists in order to avoid duplication of work 3) Shortened rationale and the EU policy context separated Some text is marked in yellow. Please have a look whether what is there is acceptable. As for the roadmap until the kick-off meeting: yes, you are right that a Board consultation by correspondence is possible. However, in yesterday’s meeting with Luis it was deemed inappropriate to go for a consultation by correspondence during the holiday season when many are not in the office. Another reason was to have some time to get in touch with Omar and Enrico beforehand, in order to resolve comments as early as possible. This should help to avoid or at least to limit contentious discussions during Board consultation. Please have a look whether the draft is acceptable. There is certainly some more room for improvements. Best regards, Hermann PS: I will be on holidays next week. David is in the office. Let’s touch base early in August to get ready to interact with Oman/Enrico. From: Juanjo Hierro [<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com] Sent: 22 July 2016 7:03 AM To: Hermann Brand <<mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>Hermann.Brand at etsi.org<mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>>; franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com<mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org<mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>>; CARLOS RALLI UCENDO <carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com<mailto:carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com>>; Philippe Cousin <philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com<mailto:philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com>>; Ernoe Kovacs <Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu<mailto:Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu>>; Mulligan, Catherine E A <<mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk<mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>>; gilles.privat at orange.com<mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org<mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>> Cc: Juanjo Hierro <<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>> Subject: Re: Updated figure and question about status On 21/07/16 20:06, Hermann Brand wrote: Thank you Juanjo. I noted ‘mediation GW’. Please find some editorial changes in the attachment. Those changes are fine. Thanks. I’ll send the full updated proposal document tomorrow late afternoon (will meet David tomorrow again, Patrick is on holidays). That would be great! We (David and myself) had a meeting with Luis today to clarify the next steps … 1) Luis wants to submit the CIM proposal to the Board for consultation timely enough to have a final discussion in the upcoming Board#109 on 14/15 September (submission in the second half of August, at least in week 34). Does this mean to delay the kick-off so it wouldn't be able to take place in September as planned? This comes as a surprise to me because I remember that, since the first time we discussed about creation of the ISG, it was always explained to us that approval of ISGs didn't require running a discussion during a ETSI Board f2f meeting ... honestly, I feel frustrated. If there is no other mean but closing the discussion at the ETSI Board f2f meeting on the 14-15 of September, and there is also a requirement to announce the kick-off of the ISG one month in advance, we would kindly ask that things are arranged so that we can announce the kick-off of the ISG immediately after the ETSI board f2f meeting, ideally the same September 15th or 16th. This would allow to minimize the delay from the target date. If you know about another mean to announce a kick-off date even earlier, please let us know. 2) In order to ensure a ‘smooth’ consultation as much as possible, we recommend to share the proposal with the chairmen of SmartM2M (Enrico) and oneM2M (Omar) before it is submitted to the Board. This would allow to clarify issues beforehand. If you – the founding members – agree, we –the Secretariat – would on behalf of you, the founding members send the proposal to Enrico and Omar. That is fine for me, so unless someone else raises any objection, please go ahead. Please do so putting in copy the rest of the team representing Orange (Gilles), NEC (Ernoe), EGM (Franck), Telefónica (Carlos and me) and OASC (Cathy). This way, we can answer any question they may have. Best regards, -- Juanjo That’s all for today… Best regards, Hermann From: Juanjo Hierro [<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com] Sent: 21 July 2016 7:51 AM To: franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com<mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>; David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org><mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>; CARLOS RALLI UCENDO <carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com><mailto:carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com>; Hermann Brand <Hermann.Brand at etsi.org><mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>; Philippe Cousin <philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com><mailto:philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com>; Ernoe Kovacs <Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu><mailto:Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu>; Mulligan, Catherine E A <c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk><mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>; gilles.privat at orange.com<mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com>; Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org><mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org> Cc: Juanjo Hierro <mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> Subject: Updated figure and question about status Dear Hermann, Patrick, Please find enclosed a powerpoint file with the figure to incorporate in the updated version of the ToR. I don't remember whether we finally agree to replace "connector" by "adapter gateway" or "mediator gateway" but since you will be able to edit the figure, you can incorporate the final term you recall. I added an element representing some kind of repository of Context Information Models which could make sense in an architecture picture while may be helpful because this way all elements about which specifications efforts will be carried out are represented (in green): * Restful binding of the NGSI API (illustrated by means of incorporating JSON-LD using brackets) * Specifications of Common Context Information Models * Specifications to be supported by Data Publication platforms. Could you Hermann or Patrick update us on the status of the ToR. We agreed to have a version finalized this week ... Please note that I'm on holidays until July 26th. I will be reading emails, mostly in the evenings, but I may exhibit a slow response. Please copy the rest of the team in any case. Thanks! -- Juanjo On 12/07/16 19:51, <mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com> franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com<mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com> wrote: Franck -----Original Message----- From: Patrick Guillemin <Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org><mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org> To: Franck Le Gall <franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com><mailto:franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>, David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org><mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>, CARLOS RALLI UCENDO <carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com><mailto:carlos.ralliucendo at telefonica.com>, Hermann Brand <Hermann.Brand at etsi.org><mailto:Hermann.Brand at etsi.org>, Philippe Cousin <philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com><mailto:philippe.cousin at eglobalmark.com>, JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com>, Ernoe Kovacs <Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu><mailto:Ernoe.Kovacs at neclab.eu>, "Mulligan, Catherine E A" <c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk><mailto:c.mulligan at imperial.ac.uk>, "gilles.privat at orange.com"<mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com> <mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com> <gilles.privat at orange.com><mailto:gilles.privat at orange.com> Sent: mar., 12 juil. 2016 19:34 Subject: FW: The figure with phased approach From: Patrick Guillemin Sent: 12 July 2016 7:31 PM To: JUAN JOSE HIERRO SUREDA <mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> Subject: Tr: Envoyé de mon smartphone BlackBerry 10 sur le réseau Orange. De: Patrick Guillemin <<mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org<mailto:Patrick.Guillemin at etsi.org>> Envoyé: mardi 12 juillet 2016 19:29 À: Patrick Guillemin Objet: Envoyé de mon smartphone BlackBerry 10 sur le réseau Orange. ________________________________ Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição ________________________________ Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição ________________________________ Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição ________________________________ Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição ________________________________ Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição ________________________________ Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição ________________________________ Este mensaje y sus adjuntos se dirigen exclusivamente a su destinatario, puede contener información privilegiada o confidencial y es para uso exclusivo de la persona o entidad de destino. Si no es usted. el destinatario indicado, queda notificado de que la lectura, utilización, divulgación y/o copia sin autorización puede estar prohibida en virtud de la legislación vigente. Si ha recibido este mensaje por error, le rogamos que nos lo comunique inmediatamente por esta misma vía y proceda a su destrucción. The information contained in this transmission is privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, do not read it. Please immediately reply to the sender that you have received this communication in error and then delete it. Esta mensagem e seus anexos se dirigem exclusivamente ao seu destinatário, pode conter informação privilegiada ou confidencial e é para uso exclusivo da pessoa ou entidade de destino. Se não é vossa senhoria o destinatário indicado, fica notificado de que a leitura, utilização, divulgação e/ou cópia sem autorização pode estar proibida em virtude da legislação vigente. Se recebeu esta mensagem por erro, rogamos-lhe que nos o comunique imediatamente por esta mesma via e proceda a sua destruição -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-oasc-etsi/attachments/20160823/d962631c/attachment.html>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy