Hi, Thank you for the update. It looks like the December demo was wrongly interpreted as it was a technical demo to show the benefits of semantic approach to build interoperability, and not to position one platform vs other one. I welcome the Carlos review of the proposal. Kind regards Franck De : Juanjo Hierro [mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com] Envoyé : vendredi 13 mai 2016 09:15 À : Franck Le Gall <franck.le-gall at eglobalmark.com>; Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org Objet : Re: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] Status about ETSI ISG creation Dear Franck, Thanks for asking, I was just going to send around an email with updates :-) Carlos Ralli has been working on a proposal for the text to be included that clarifies the non-existence of conflicts between the Context Information Management layer that provides the FIWARE NGSI API and OneM2M. It will be circulated later today for revision. It tries to answer a number of questions that ETSI had formulated as comments to the ToR. This week FIWARE was attending the TMForumLive event in Nice where it has had a significant presence. I was there so I took advantage of it to propose a meeting with Hermann Brand and Patrick Guillemin from ETSI which finally took place yesterday afternoon before taking my plane back home. The meeting was quite productive since it gave me the possibility to explain how a Context Information Management (CIM) layer and OneM2M could fit together in an overall reference architecture for smart application/solutions without collisions. The Context Information Management layer exporting the FIWARE NGSI API and dealing with real-time gathering/management/publication of context information coming from multiples sources, not just the IoT. OneM2M being a potential solution to deal with management of the connectivity with IoT devices and collection of information from that space. Hermann and Patrick were very happy with that explanation and agreed that such vision helps to explain that there is no conflicts with OneM2M, therefore what we pretend to do in the ISG is complementary with what OneM2M is doing. I explained to them that we would send a version of the ToR next week which captures this vision, therefore let's work on reviewing what Carlos has produced to produce that new draft. I also agreed with them that such part of the ToR would be reviewed with Omar Elloumi, technical chair of OneM2M. If we have the text ready before the OneM2M meeting you refer to in Seoul, this would be a good opportunity to discuss it with Omar but I want to put clear emphasis on one matter: It is very much important that we don't position the CIM layer and OneM2M as two platforms at the same level that can interoperate. Interoperability means nothing (any two systems can interoperate if you develop software that translates messages from one system to the other). This apparently has been done in the past and it was how some people, including Omar, interpreted the FIWARE-OneM2M interoperability demos presented last December, becoming then a source of existing misunderstandings and feelings about potential conflicts. CIM goes on top, being able to handle information that may come from OneM2M but also many other different context information sources (with emphasis on non-IoT sources). This is the right architectural vision as I have repeated multiple times. Interestingly, it is also at the eyes of people like Omar. One evidence of that is that you would still require a CIM layer to gather/manage/publish context information in scenarios (within a smart city, for example) where you don't deploy any sensor. Using OneM2M as the tool to gather/manage/publish context information in such scenarios would make no sense (and people like Omar knows this). We have to be extremely careful in that respect when running conversations with OneM2M technical people to avoid creating further misunderstandings. The other point that we have to review in the ToR has to do with the request from ETSI to add background info about FIWARE NGSI, including a reference to OMA NGSI as the abstract specs it was based on and the fact that FIWARE NGSI comes as a result of defining a RESTful binding of the OMA NGSI abstract specs supporting some additional features and solving some gaps that were found in the original OMA NGSI specs based on the experience gathered through its implementation and usage in real projects. I will propose some text that I will circulate to you along this weekend. Hermann and Patrick explained to me that once the ISG is created, ETSI will activate their liaison with OMA to let them know that the ISG has been launched and this creates an opportunity for bringing back results of the ISG to OMA (but without putting a requirement on OMA to do so if they don't want to put the necessary resources). ETSI has proposed the EC to join the ISG as counsellor and they have accepted (I lobby for that ;-) so this is also good news. Thibaut Kleiner met the ETSI team at the beginning of this week and I also met Thibaut while at TMForumLive. Apparently he passed again clear messages about the support from the EC to creation of this ISG (reinforced with the recent package communication from the EC where the EC made explicit references to FIWARE) which always helps ;-) Cheers, -- Juanjo On 13/05/16 07:51, Franck Le Gall wrote: Dear Juanjo Did you get any feedback from ETSI team on your request ? If not, I will be next week at the oneM2M plenary meeting in Seoul and may find some time to review that part of text together with Martin from NEC and involving Omar. Then next is the AIOTI HLA discussion on 25th where Carlos is involved Kind regards Franck De : 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] De la part de Juanjo Hierro Envoyé : mercredi 27 avril 2016 05:17 À : Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org> Objet : Re: [Fiware-oasc-etsi] Status about ETSI ISG creation Hi, Apparently, some good news in reaction to the email sent to ETSI. They have confirmed that, after the discussions recently hold, the only point they believe that has to be fixed has to do with introducing concise and convincing statements about how the ISG complements oneM2M. I have proposed them to go through the ToR document we sent and make editiorial change proposals on the matter (and other matters they may find while carrying out a revision). I believe this is more pragmatic that trying to guess what concrete statements we may add on our side. Once they send me a version of the ToR document with comments, I will share it in this list, so that we can take a look at it collectively and decide altogether whether to accept the proposed changes or amend them. Bottom line, I believe the ball is on their garden again, but I feel like we are making progress. We have to put all our efforts to get this completed before June. Otherwise, we enter too close to risky summer-time :-) Cheers, -- juano ______________________________________________________ Coordinator and Chief Architect, FIWARE platform IoT Unit, Telefónica email: juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> twitter: @JuanjoHierro You can follow FIWARE at: website: http://www.fiware.org twitter: @FIWARE facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 On 26/04/16 09:17, Juanjo Hierro wrote: Hi all, This is an email to brief you all on the status regarding the ISG creation. Our initial proposal apparently raised some issues at ETSI in a first approach, mostly because several wrong assumptions on their side IMHO. First, because they understood we wanted to place open source development/implementation activities under the umbrella of the ISG when the intention was always to be focused on producing specifications only. Second, because a wrong perception regarding conflict with OneM2M. Last but not least, I feel like ETSI didn't understand that we were not willing to start from square one regarding specifications to be produced and that was a hard requirement on our side. We won't go for an ISG where we start everything from the scartch (at least, not Telefónica). Fortunately, we have been able to meet with ETSI and also OneM2M representatives since this first exchange with very positive/encouraging results. First in Rome, while at the event of the IES-City Framework Working Group launched by NIST regarding standardization and identification of best practices in Smart Cities. Second in Brussels, while at the NetFutures event. Now, I believe we have a good common level of understanding that should help moving ahead. Please find enclosed the email I have just sent to ETSI representatives, summarizing the results of our conversations (at least from our side). I also asked them about concrete next steps moving ahead. Please read it carefully as to make sure we are on the same page regarding messages. If you see any conflict, don't hesitate to raise it and let's discuss it. The EC is aware of these conversations and it has also participated actively in them. The 2016 Rolling Plan on ICT Standardization and the recent communication package from the EC regarding actions on IoT and Digitising the European Industry, play on our side :-) One important feedback regarding relationship with OneM2M to bear in mind. Interestingly enough, when we discussed with Omar Elloumi about relationship between FIWARE NGSI and OneM2M, his vision was that they should not be put at the same level, very much as I also believe it is the right approach. Indeed, he seems to understand very well that FIWARE NGSI is a higher level API dealing with context information management at large, including but not limited to information captured from the IoT space. During our discussion in Rome, he sketched a Reference Architecture where OneM2M was focused on dealing with interaction with IoT devices and networks, then injecting IoT data in the Context Information Management layer which would be implemented using Context Broker components exporting the FIWARE NGSI interface. The Context Information management layer would collect info from the IoT space but also other sources, exposing an homogenous API northbound to applications and other systems (FIWARE NGSI). This is precisely the vision we (at least Telefónica) have promoted in several pervious discussions. Apparently, Omar was not very happy with the proposition made in some interoperability pilots, where both OneM2M and FIWARE NGSI where treated as technology working at the same layer so those pilots were just showcasing how a platform based on OneM2M could interoperate with a platform based on FIWARE NGSI (he made a explicit reference to the interoperability prototypes demonstrated in the ETSI M2M Workshop last December). I have to confess that interoperability at the same layer was also not my best option trying to explain how OneM2M and FIWARE NGSI can work together. In that respect, I showed to Omar a picture of a reference architecture similar to the one I proposed in the Wise-IoT project (attached for your convenience) and apparently it was more aligned with his vision. Please take this into consideration if you enter into technical discussion with ETSI or OneM2M representatives. Placing OneM2M and FIWARE NGSI at the same level, despite proving they can interoperate (everything can interoperate, it will be just a matter of putting efforts in the necessary adapter software :-), does not help but precisely raises the issue about potential overlapping/competition. Let's see. I'll keep you posted. In the meantime, don't hesitate to elaborate on the same messages if it happens that you interact with any ETSI officer or some representative from the ETSI Board. Again, please take your time to read my summarty about comon understanding sent to ETSI, in order to make sure we deliver the same messages. Best regards, -- Juanjo ______________________________________________________ Coordinator and Chief Architect, FIWARE platform IoT Unit, Telefónica email: juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com<mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> twitter: @JuanjoHierro You can follow FIWARE at: website: http://www.fiware.org twitter: @FIWARE facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Re: Terms of Reference of a proposal for the creation of an ETSI ISG on cross-cutting Context Information Management (CIM) standards for Smart Applications using Open and Agile Smart Cities as catalyst Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 07:27:52 +0200 From: Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> 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> CC: David Boswarthick <David.Boswarthick at etsi.org><mailto:David.Boswarthick at etsi.org>, Luis Jorge Romero <luis.romero at etsi.org><mailto:luis.romero at etsi.org>, Juanjo Hierro <juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com><mailto:juanjose.hierro at telefonica.com> Dear ETSI team, I would like to follow up on next steps regarding creation of the ETSI ISG on cross-cutting Context Information Management (CIM) standards for Smart Applications, at the light of recent conversations that took place in Rome and recently in Brussels. As explained in Rome, work within the ISG would be focused on specifications. Development of an open source reference implementation of those specs will be addressed within the FIWARE Open Source community, but implementation activities would be run aside of the ISG. This was apparently a source of misunderstanding because we never wanted to put open source development activities taking place within FIWARE under the umbrella of the ISG. We are happy to clarify this point anywhere in the ISG ToR, although we believe there was no part of the document from which this could be inferred. Anyways, suggestions about wording that may clarify this further are welcome. With respect to the specs to be produced, I believe that we reached a good level of common understanding during our conversations in Rome. We aim to deliver sets of specs in three areas: API, Data Publication Platform and Common Information Models. Level of maturity in each of these areas is different and I believe we agreed that it is about leveraging on what is already mature, proven and increasingly adopted (the API) while concentrating efforts on what requires further development and resources (Common Information Models and Data Publication Platform specs, the former requiring much of the effort). This as opposed to going to square one in all three areas, which would be against the interest of capturing the current window opportunity of leading standards for smart applications from Europe. In all cases, dealing with evolution of all of the specs following a "driven by implementation" approach rather than a "design by committee", that is relying on feedback from actual implementations already taking place, first in the domain of Smart Cities (here leveraging on increasing adoption thanks to the OASC initiative) but also in other domains. We can leverage on the ecosystems that is growing around the proposed standards and the strong political support from the EC, expressed in the recent communication package regarding the Digital Single Market strategy [1] [2] [3]. In another front, it was clear that there is no collision but complementarity between the areas we are trying to cover within the ISG and the work being developed in OneM2M. Indeed, the OneM2M framework is focused on solving how data can be gathered from the IoT space, and be injected as context information which can be merged with that coming from other sources of information, altogether offered to applications in a homogeneous way through the proposed Context Information Management APIs, using agreed Common Information Models and relying on Data Publication platforms supporting defined specs for publishing the catalogue/registry of available data resources. This, in my opinion, may even help to leverage adoption of OneM2M since all pieces together can help to define a complete Reference Architecture for IoT-enabled Smart Applications (although I see that more as an activity that would go beyond the ISG and OneM2M, because none need to depend each other, maybe as the result of some working group or project aiming at that specific goal of defining a Reference Architecture where both elements can be used together) I understood that David was going to come back to ETSI and brief on results of our conversations in Rome, looking for the best way moving ahead. I also understood that Patrick had also some productive conversations with the EC while at Net Futures. I would like to discuss about concrete next steps. Should we setup a confcall? [1] - https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/communication-digitising-european-industry-reaping-full-benefits-digital-single-market . [2] - https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/news/staff-working-document-advancing-internet-things-europe [3] - https://ec.europa.eu/commission/2014-2019/oettinger/announcements/keynote-speech-closing-plenary-session-net-futures-2016-brussels_en Best regards, -- Juanjo Hierro ________________________________ 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 _______________________________________________ Fiware-oasc-etsi mailing list Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org<mailto:Fiware-oasc-etsi at lists.fiware.org> https://lists.fiware.org/listinfo/fiware-oasc-etsi ________________________________ 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/20160516/dc3ecd02/attachment.html>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy