From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Mon May 4 09:43:20 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Mon, 4 May 2015 07:43:20 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: R: Demo slides In-Reply-To: References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62C4B1DC3@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62C4B1ECF@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4A4447@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi Pepe, All, the new contributions should be fine. The "under specific condition" was only meant to explain my view, and not a practical suggestion to modify text. Pier is merging, refining and harmonizing the different contributions for I2ND presentation. Gianmario -----Messaggio originale----- Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: gioved? 30 aprile 2015 19:24 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: Re: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: Demo slides Hi all, Since the mail sent to the list said "c) overall architectural aspects + workplan details." I understood that the overall was applying to the workplan. My fault. I've rebuild the FIROS workplan in order to only include the tasks related to this release. I still don't think we should include the "under specific conditions" phrase: FIROS is working following the current FIROS-RCM specifications. Also, the limiting elements are the network and the contextBroker, not an element from Robotics GE. BR, Pepe. On 30/04/15 18:36, Bollano Gianmario wrote: > Hi Pepe (Jose?), > the milestones shouldn't be high-level in this presentation. > In fact, they only are the milestones of this sprint (Pier has defined them Workplan detail). > > Your Workplan table say "YES, Achieved", but this is more precisely, "Yes, under specific conditions". > Robotics specification is still in progress and we are still defining which, why and how many are these "specific conditions". > "Specific conditions" refers for instance: > - list of Topics / List of messages Types, their number, their format and notation > - list of conditions for commands/data messages - such as: Update > frequency , message size limit, binary content and all of these are not yet clearly identified and defined. > > IMHO, some generic Milestones are not yet Achieved (but they will be) because a more detailed Milestone is still in progress: > e.g. Investigating conditions to fit to requirements for both Robotics ROS environment and the Context Broker. > > As a conclusion, obviously anyone of us is free to define his milestone as he think it's better to describe his work. > Only keep in mind we will have one presentation for Robotics - not two - we should be aware not to say something and then something that sound very different in the same or next slide. > > Gianmario > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: Jose Jaime Ariza [mailto:jjaime at ikergune.com] > Inviato: gioved? 30 aprile 2015 17:15 > A: Bollano Gianmario > Oggetto: Re: [Fiware-robotics] R: Demo slides > > Hi all, > > As I have understood, we must include the whole Robotics GE workplan status in the third slide, so I've included those high-level milestones. > > The work plan is not as you say, Coca Cola optimistic. It's just the current status of FIROS. > > BR, > Pepe. > > On 30/04/15 16:55, Bollano Gianmario wrote: >> Hi, >> Pepe/Jose, the structure of the slides is fine; only the Workplan looks to me - let me say - too much Coca Cola optimistic. >> >> I think all of us can agree that many aspects are still under investigation concerning CB and the FIROS-RCM communication (just to consider the last exchanged e-mails and the robotics call). >> This is not a bad point, it's just a proof of the effort to converge to a good shared specification. >> >> Then in the workplan slide I'd suggest to use more specific/focused/limited milestones, otherwise anything would appear as real as a Coca Cola advertising, and Christmas is not even close! >> >> Roberto, Davide and Fabio have knowledge of the practical work done this sprint then they will let you know if they prefer adding their contribution to the slides you've prepared, or preparing their slides to merge. >> This is just a technical issue and will not affect the result, because Pier will merge ET and TI slides, as well as all other contributions. >> >> Best, >> Gianmario >> >> >> -----Messaggio originale----- >> Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org >> [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose >> Jaime Ariza >> Inviato: gioved? 30 aprile 2015 16:25 >> A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org >> Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Demo slides >> >> Hi all, >> >> I've created three slides exposing the status and progress of FIROS >> (https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1SH91S1X0Izm_9BxZ3ZLj09t9Dj6H >> z ydB_a8Z5kxHF5M/edit?usp=sharing), but I'm not totally sure about >> what to write regarding RCM. Could you >> (TI) complete them or give me some hint? >> >> Pier, let me know if you expected something different. >> >> BR, >> Pepe. >> >> -- >> Jos? Jaime Ariza >> R&D Engineer >> +34 696604288 >> Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Fiware-robotics mailing list >> Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org >> https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics >> >> Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. >> >> This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Fiware-robotics mailing list >> Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org >> https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics >> > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware-robotics mailing list > Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics > -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group _______________________________________________ Fiware-robotics mailing list Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics From roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it Tue May 5 09:56:08 2015 From: roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it (Antonini Roberto) Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 07:56:08 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: Interesting topics References: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D3795A@TELMBB001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D48AAF@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Hi all, Hence, once paid attention to: ? ROS messages not conveying more than 1MB per message, ? update rate less than ... (please specify) ? not have binary-alike data Theoretically we could create whichever attribute coming from whichever ROS message, as FIROS doesn't have limitations. Just an example to better understand what we mean, here is the ROS message conveying info from kobuki robot (the turtlebot base): ~sensors/core (kobuki_msgs/SensorState) ? Kobuki sensor data messages. This topic provides detailed information about the entire state package that is transmitted at 50Hz from the robot. info there are also related to robot and PC battery and, as you can see, it's a very flat message; hoping that 50 hz of frequency rate could be accepted by CB, for sure the amount of data is very far less than 1MB. As you can see, if we want to engage turtlebot2 robot, this message inform users of its remaining battery. A couple of questions from example above: ? Given RCM being able to retrieve this message from the clone of turtlebot robot, could FIROS filter it out, as it's not included in the list you sent us? ? Starting for message type example above, have you considered that ROS message type provided to FIROS strictly depend on the launched ROS nodes (kobuki driver ROS node)? In our view, you shouldn't limit a-priori the ROS message types, otherwise, in this case, we wouldn't know anything about robot battery. Our suggestion is a black list instead of a white list, that is the list of ROS message type the CB is not able to manage! What d'you think? BR RCM Team. Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: gioved? 30 aprile 2015 12:44 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: Re: [Fiware-robotics] R: Interesting topics Hi all, We've found some limitations in contextBroker: 1) As you can find in the wiki, the request maximum size is 1MB, which is not enough for some topics. 2) ContextBroker does not recycle TCP sockets, neither it accepts keep-alive http connections. So, the TCP sockets usage is really high, which results in weird network behavior or outages. This one can be avoided by limitting the update rate or the number of elements that must be updated. 3) We've some issues while sending binary-alike data to contextBroker (images and so). There are other issues in coding and minor differences between the several versions of contextBroker, but FIROS usually can handle them. BR, Pepe On 30/04/15 09:18, Antonini Roberto wrote: Hi Pepe, starting from the list below, I have some doubt about how CB is working, I will try to better explain what I mean: to my know, CB allows external user to create entity and its attributes, for sake of simplicity I report the JSON object you have to post to do it: "contextElements": [ { "type": "Room", "isPattern": "false", "id": "Room1", "attributes": [ { "name": "temperature", "type": "float", "value": "23" }, { "name": "pressure", "type": "integer", "value": "720" } ] } ], "updateAction": "APPEND" I consider FIROS an external user from CB perspective, correct me if I'm wrong, so FIROS it's able to create, publish to CB (e.g. example above) and being notified when something change (i.e. the pressure of room named Room1). In order to project Robot Clone to CB, FIROS creates an entity, named as the Robot Clone, with attributes reporting the ROS messages in the format above, i.e.: "contextElements": [ { "type": "Robot", "isPattern": "false", "id": "Turtlebot", "attributes": [ { "name": "/cmd_vel", "type": "geometry_msgs/Twist", "value": "{linear : { x : 0, y : 0, z : 0 }, angular : { x : 0, y : 0, z : 0, w : 0} }" }, { "name": "/odom", "type": "nav_msgs/odometry", "value": "{ ... }" } ] } ], "updateAction": "APPEND" So CB accepts, let's say, JSON object to be configured, if I want to move the robot I have to update object above by simply changing some values in /cmd_vel attribute, i.e. : "contextElements": [ { "type": "Robot", "isPattern": "false", "id": "Turtlebot", "attributes": [ { "name": "/cmd_vel", "type": "geometry_msgs/Twist", "value": "{linear : { x : 0.3, y : 0, z : 0 }, angular : { x : 0, y : 0, z : 0, w : 0} }" }, ] } ], "updateAction": "APPEND" In this way the robot will be moved along x axis with a velocity of 30 cm/s. The /odom attribute instead notify me, as FIWARE user, with robot position estimate with a rate of 10 or 20 Hz, in this case FIROS subscribes /odom topic and publishes its value to CB in order to update the value for FIWARE user benefit. Starting from the examples above, could you please clarify to us which are the CB limitations? I suppose they are more related to something like /odom dynamic and particularly the value update frequency, in that case 10 or 20 Hz, is it correct? Thanks in advance, Roberto Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: mercoled? 29 aprile 2015 16:03 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Interesting topics Hi all, Just as commented in the last call, here you have some of the topics which contextBroker can manage and are interesting enough to be sent "outside ROS": Topic Message type cmd_vel geometry_msgs.msg.Twist cmd_vel_mux/input/teleop geometry_msgs.msg.Twist move_base/cancel actionlib_msgs.msg.GoalID move_base/goal move_base_msgs.msg.MoveBaseActionGoal move_base/result move_base_msgs.msg.MoveBaseActionResult BR, Pepe -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Tue May 5 10:03:03 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 08:03:03 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics weekly call Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4A8C18@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi all, Pier cannot attend today but we can have the weekly Robotics call with hangout as usual. We can use for Robotics call minutes the same document of the previous calls: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CAwhNqoMf7KnP_yHjITo2gRrVoWCKMsthiWX3ZWWLHo/edit?pli=1 Gianmario Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 2629 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Tue May 5 11:45:15 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 09:45:15 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Proposal for WorkPlan refining Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4A8D11@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi All, as proposed in the Robotics call, I would suggest a proposals to enrich Work Plan adding information: For each Task, any partner involved (WHO) will add a short list of Actions (HOW) [Done] or [In progress] (e.g those defined in Robotics calls, e-mails). This should describe and clarify what is required/in progress for each task. I don't mean adding extra work, just collecting in one place the useful information that we've already exchanged by calls/e-mails . I give you an example below, the level of details can be freely decided. We can also shortly add (in parenthesis) the solution adopted. T.1.1 Hardware setup Description: The robot must be equipped with the following elements: * computer able to run ROS * wireless connection able to connect to the network deployed in T1.9 * videocamera All of these elements must be powered using the robot's or its own boarded power supply. The robot platform, the videocamera and the wireless system must be connected to the computer and all the required drivers must be installed. Outcome: A ready-to-work robot able to stream video and receive teleoperation commands via wireless connection. Actions: TI: [Done] Selection of a Robot (Turtlebot?), installing a WebRTC Client on Robot (Chrome), Installing an App Server (NodeJs) and Kurento Client. Testing a Wireless WebRTC connection between Robot / Kurento Client (WiFi?); [In Progress]... ET: ... In this way we'll have: - The shared Google Doc FIROS-RCM as source for the Open Specs / Open API FIWARE deliverable - The shared Doc WorkPlan as source for Live Demos document and Jira Story/WorkItem . Possibly also useful to define some of Unit Tests (FIWARE deliverable requested at M13 for all features). Interaction with other GEs owners is welcomed, but likely we don't have much feedback, apart to specific answers to specific technical questions. Possibly this list of actions might also help to address technical question/issues to other GEs. Best, Gianmario ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telecom Italia Gianmario Bollano Innovation - Mobile Devices & Sim Applications Via Reiss Romoli, n? 274 Cap 10151 Torino Phone 011 228 7103 Cell Phone 3316015048 Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it Tue May 5 16:12:00 2015 From: roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it (Antonini Roberto) Date: Tue, 5 May 2015 14:12:00 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: Proposal for WorkPlan refining In-Reply-To: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4A8D11@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4A8D11@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D49E1C@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Hi all, starting from suggestions of Gianmario, I organized and enlarged the two tasks of stage 1 I told you . Please have a look and let me know if you agree on these. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Bollano Gianmario Inviato: marted? 5 maggio 2015 11:45 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Proposal for WorkPlan refining Hi All, as proposed in the Robotics call, I would suggest a proposals to enrich Work Plan adding information: For each Task, any partner involved (WHO) will add a short list of Actions (HOW) [Done] or [In progress] (e.g those defined in Robotics calls, e-mails). This should describe and clarify what is required/in progress for each task. I don't mean adding extra work, just collecting in one place the useful information that we've already exchanged by calls/e-mails . I give you an example below, the level of details can be freely decided. We can also shortly add (in parenthesis) the solution adopted. T.1.1 Hardware setup Description: The robot must be equipped with the following elements: * computer able to run ROS * wireless connection able to connect to the network deployed in T1.9 * videocamera All of these elements must be powered using the robot's or its own boarded power supply. The robot platform, the videocamera and the wireless system must be connected to the computer and all the required drivers must be installed. Outcome: A ready-to-work robot able to stream video and receive teleoperation commands via wireless connection. Actions: TI: [Done] Selection of a Robot (Turtlebot?), installing a WebRTC Client on Robot (Chrome), Installing an App Server (NodeJs) and Kurento Client. Testing a Wireless WebRTC connection between Robot / Kurento Client (WiFi?); [In Progress]... ET: ... In this way we'll have: - The shared Google Doc FIROS-RCM as source for the Open Specs / Open API FIWARE deliverable - The shared Doc WorkPlan as source for Live Demos document and Jira Story/WorkItem . Possibly also useful to define some of Unit Tests (FIWARE deliverable requested at M13 for all features). Interaction with other GEs owners is welcomed, but likely we don't have much feedback, apart to specific answers to specific technical questions. Possibly this list of actions might also help to address technical question/issues to other GEs. Best, Gianmario ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telecom Italia Gianmario Bollano Innovation - Mobile Devices & Sim Applications Via Reiss Romoli, n? 274 Cap 10151 Torino Phone 011 228 7103 Cell Phone 3316015048 Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 677 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: From luis.lopez at urjc.es Wed May 6 17:18:30 2015 From: luis.lopez at urjc.es (=?iso-8859-1?Q?Luis_L=F3pez_Fern=E1ndez?=) Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 17:18:30 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics Live Demo Work plan In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Jaime, I filled a short paragraph describing the task (T.1.7) under Kurento responsibility. Let me know if you miss something. Best. ----------------------------------------------------------- Luis L?pez Fern?ndez Subdirector de Investigaci?n y Relaciones con la Empresa Escuela T?cnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicaci?n Universidad Rey Juan Carlos http://www.etsit.urjc.es e-mail: luis.lopez at urjc.es Tf1: +34 914 888 747 Tf2: + 34 914 888 713 El 30/04/2015, a las 15:17, Jose Jaime Ariza escribi?: > Hi Kurento and Wirecloud guys, > > We are developing a workplan for the robotics live demo: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qYa9UQcx1kGgQF07MUvlfM0P9NK5j2u8d2cAarKIlLY/edit#heading=h.f7mi0tl88him > Please, have a look and provide any comment you think necessary. > > We are expanding the descriptions of the tasks and adding its outcomes. > Could you take in charge of those related with Kurento and Wirecloud. > > Thank you very much, > Pepe. > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From igonzalez at ikergune.com Thu May 7 15:17:35 2015 From: igonzalez at ikergune.com (=?utf-8?B?ScOxaWdvIEdvbnphbGV6?=) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 15:17:35 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] 2 level filter for robotics GE Message-ID: Hi, as we talk in the call, here yo have what we talked about in the last call, I explain why we should use the 2 level filter and answer the points that were asked in the call: Proposal The robotics GE?s main objective is to make easy for users the robot managing. Most of those users are common developers that have development knowledges but no knowledge in robotics, so to make an easy and user friendly integration of FIWARE + robots we have thought that FIROS + RCM Generic enabler should have a 2 level filter: RCM - Application level filter RCM will filter the topics that aren?t necessary for the user, for example those used only in navigation algorithms like happens with the cloud of points. This is quite important for the common user, because this filter will reduce the amount of topics he will be notificated of, making easier to know which topics are important to interact with the robot. When RCM is going to bring up the robot with its configuration, a kobuki for example, it knows that it should bring up a kinect (or a laser), a mobile base and navigation algorithms. Many of the topics generated aren?t necessary for user interaction and/or aren?t compatible with the contextbroker, so if the robot contains topics of this type (not necessary for user or not CB compatible) it won?t send them to FIROS. So this filter will be an application level filter and the user shouldn?t touch it. If a user wants to change this configuration (something not recommended) RCM shall provide an API to override the configuration as it is done in FIROS. RCM should filter the topics as it is configured to, but if the users send to the api new filter rules, the new ones should overwrite the default ones. FIROS - User Level filter In the other hand firos has a robot ? topic whitelist. This list will be a user level filter, where the user defines the robot and the topics he wants publish or listen to. This whitelist supports regular expressions so a user can connect with more topics writing less. With this solution RCM will send to FIROS the topics that the user can use (sending all has no sense, because the user can?t do anything with them). And the user will select from this list which ones will use. Comments from the talk Use a blacklist instead a whitelist The user will use less topics that the ones that won?t be used so using a whitelist the user will have to configure less things. RCM sends all the topics and the user should say which ones aren?t compatible with CB If a user that is not familiar with robotics have to check each messages? format and size to change the configuration no one will use the robotics GE, because configuring one robot would take lots of hours, a kobuki with a kinect brings up at least 30 topics, as is said check the format and size (the size can be different depending on content) of each one can take hours or days of work. To give flexibility RCM will send all the topics to Firos and it will filter them This is not a good idea, FIROS doesn?t know about robots, so it shouldn?t know what things it has to filter, but RCM knows which things are brought up, so RCM should filter some thing. If it would be necessary in some moment to have access to other topics RCM will provide of an api to change the filter as is said before. FIROS have this implemented for the user level filter, it has a file where the user adds the robots and the topics, but it haves a rest api that overwrites this configuration, so if a user only configures FIROS to publish to goal, and after that adds the teleop using the api it will listen to both of topics. So RCM should do the same, by default send only the topics needed by the user and if the user needs more he will ask for them. RCM should publish all the topics, since the user maybe wants to use ros via rosbridge Rosbridge is a ros tools and is independent to firos and RCM, if a user wants to work with rosbridge it won't go through FIROS and RCM, so FIROS and RCM don?t need any change to allow a user to use rosbridge. Regards, I?igo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Thu May 7 15:36:51 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 15:36:51 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics Live Demo Work plan References: Message-ID: Hi, Thank you very much, Luis, I think the description is perfect. Could you add the related action? (take a look at T1.3 or T1.4). If you think the task must be split, please let me know. BR, Pepe. On 06/05/15 17:18, Luis L?pez Fern?ndez wrote: Hi Jaime, I filled a short paragraph describing the task (T.1.7) under Kurento responsibility. Let me know if you miss something. Best. ----------------------------------------------------------- Luis L?pez Fern?ndez Subdirector de Investigaci?n y Relaciones con la Empresa Escuela T?cnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicaci?n Universidad Rey Juan Carlos http://www.etsit.urjc.es e-mail: luis.lopez at urjc.es Tf1: +34 914 888 747 Tf2: + 34 914 888 713 El 30/04/2015, a las 15:17, Jose Jaime Ariza > escribi?: Hi Kurento and Wirecloud guys, We are developing a workplan for the robotics live demo: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qYa9UQcx1kGgQF07MUvlfM0P9NK5j2u8d2cAarKIlLY/edit#heading=h.f7mi0tl88him Please, have a look and provide any comment you think necessary. We are expanding the descriptions of the tasks and adding its outcomes. Could you take in charge of those related with Kurento and Wirecloud. Thank you very much, Pepe. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Thu May 7 17:14:08 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 15:14:08 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4B9B01@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi, thank you for the detailed description, it will be very useful for further refinements. Today Davide and Roberto are off site; they?ll provide comments and proposals as soon as possible. Best, Gianmario Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: gioved? 7 maggio 2015 15:18 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi, as we talk in the call, here yo have what we talked about in the last call, I explain why we should use the 2 level filter and answer the points that were asked in the call: Proposal The robotics GE?s main objective is to make easy for users the robot managing. Most of those users are common developers that have development knowledges but no knowledge in robotics, so to make an easy and user friendly integration of FIWARE + robots we have thought that FIROS + RCM Generic enabler should have a 2 level filter: RCM - Application level filter RCM will filter the topics that aren?t necessary for the user, for example those used only in navigation algorithms like happens with the cloud of points. This is quite important for the common user, because this filter will reduce the amount of topics he will be notificated of, making easier to know which topics are important to interact with the robot. When RCM is going to bring up the robot with its configuration, a kobuki for example, it knows that it should bring up a kinect (or a laser), a mobile base and navigation algorithms. Many of the topics generated aren?t necessary for user interaction and/or aren?t compatible with the contextbroker, so if the robot contains topics of this type (not necessary for user or not CB compatible) it won?t send them to FIROS. So this filter will be an application level filter and the user shouldn?t touch it. If a user wants to change this configuration (something not recommended) RCM shall provide an API to override the configuration as it is done in FIROS. RCM should filter the topics as it is configured to, but if the users send to the api new filter rules, the new ones should overwrite the default ones. FIROS - User Level filter In the other hand firos has a robot ? topic whitelist. This list will be a user level filter, where the user defines the robot and the topics he wants publish or listen to. This whitelist supports regular expressions so a user can connect with more topics writing less. With this solution RCM will send to FIROS the topics that the user can use (sending all has no sense, because the user can?t do anything with them). And the user will select from this list which ones will use. Comments from the talk Use a blacklist instead a whitelist The user will use less topics that the ones that won?t be used so using a whitelist the user will have to configure less things. RCM sends all the topics and the user should say which ones aren?t compatible with CB If a user that is not familiar with robotics have to check each messages? format and size to change the configuration no one will use the robotics GE, because configuring one robot would take lots of hours, a kobuki with a kinect brings up at least 30 topics, as is said check the format and size (the size can be different depending on content) of each one can take hours or days of work. To give flexibility RCM will send all the topics to Firos and it will filter them This is not a good idea, FIROS doesn?t know about robots, so it shouldn?t know what things it has to filter, but RCM knows which things are brought up, so RCM should filter some thing. If it would be necessary in some moment to have access to other topics RCM will provide of an api to change the filter as is said before. FIROS have this implemented for the user level filter, it has a file where the user adds the robots and the topics, but it haves a rest api that overwrites this configuration, so if a user only configures FIROS to publish to goal, and after that adds the teleop using the api it will listen to both of topics. So RCM should do the same, by default send only the topics needed by the user and if the user needs more he will ask for them. RCM should publish all the topics, since the user maybe wants to use ros via rosbridge Rosbridge is a ros tools and is independent to firos and RCM, if a user wants to work with rosbridge it won't go through FIROS and RCM, so FIROS and RCM don?t need any change to allow a user to use rosbridge. Regards, I?igo Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Mon May 11 13:37:45 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 13:37:45 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: Proposal for WorkPlan refining References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4A8D11@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D49E1C@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: Hi all, I've add descriptions, outcomes and actions to all of the remaining tasks in T1 except for T1.6 which, I think, depends on wirecloud team. As far as I know, TI is going to provide the robot and the environment. Please, let me know if I'm wrong. BR, Pepe On 05/05/15 16:12, Antonini Roberto wrote: Hi all, starting from suggestions of Gianmario, I organized and enlarged the two tasks of stage 1 I told you . Please have a look and let me know if you agree on these. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Bollano Gianmario Inviato: marted? 5 maggio 2015 11:45 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Proposal for WorkPlan refining Hi All, as proposed in the Robotics call, I would suggest a proposals to enrich Work Plan adding information: For each Task, any partner involved (WHO) will add a short list of Actions (HOW) [Done] or [In progress] (e.g those defined in Robotics calls, e-mails). This should describe and clarify what is required/in progress for each task. I don't mean adding extra work, just collecting in one place the useful information that we've already exchanged by calls/e-mails . I give you an example below, the level of details can be freely decided. We can also shortly add (in parenthesis) the solution adopted. T.1.1 Hardware setup Description: The robot must be equipped with the following elements: * computer able to run ROS * wireless connection able to connect to the network deployed in T1.9 * videocamera All of these elements must be powered using the robot?s or its own boarded power supply. The robot platform, the videocamera and the wireless system must be connected to the computer and all the required drivers must be installed. Outcome: A ready-to-work robot able to stream video and receive teleoperation commands via wireless connection. Actions: TI: [Done] Selection of a Robot (Turtlebot?), installing a WebRTC Client on Robot (Chrome), Installing an App Server (NodeJs) and Kurento Client. Testing a Wireless WebRTC connection between Robot / Kurento Client (WiFi?); [In Progress]? ET: ? In this way we'll have: - The shared Google Doc FIROS-RCM as source for the Open Specs / Open API FIWARE deliverable - The shared Doc WorkPlan as source for Live Demos document and Jira Story/WorkItem . Possibly also useful to define some of Unit Tests (FIWARE deliverable requested at M13 for all features). Interaction with other GEs owners is welcomed, but likely we don?t have much feedback, apart to specific answers to specific technical questions. Possibly this list of actions might also help to address technical question/issues to other GEs. Best, Gianmario ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telecom Italia Gianmario Bollano Innovation - Mobile Devices & Sim Applications Via Reiss Romoli, n? 274 Cap 10151 Torino Phone 011 228 7103 Cell Phone 3316015048 Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. []Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Mon May 11 15:09:33 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Mon, 11 May 2015 13:09:33 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: Proposal for WorkPlan refining In-Reply-To: References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4A8D11@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D49E1C@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4BC6EE@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi Pepe, thank you for the contribution, we have material for tomorrow Robotics call. Best, Gianmario Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: luned? 11 maggio 2015 13:38 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: Re: [Fiware-robotics] R: Proposal for WorkPlan refining Hi all, I've add descriptions, outcomes and actions to all of the remaining tasks in T1 except for T1.6 which, I think, depends on wirecloud team. As far as I know, TI is going to provide the robot and the environment. Please, let me know if I'm wrong. BR, Pepe On 05/05/15 16:12, Antonini Roberto wrote: Hi all, starting from suggestions of Gianmario, I organized and enlarged the two tasks of stage 1 I told you . Please have a look and let me know if you agree on these. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Bollano Gianmario Inviato: marted? 5 maggio 2015 11:45 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Proposal for WorkPlan refining Hi All, as proposed in the Robotics call, I would suggest a proposals to enrich Work Plan adding information: For each Task, any partner involved (WHO) will add a short list of Actions (HOW) [Done] or [In progress] (e.g those defined in Robotics calls, e-mails). This should describe and clarify what is required/in progress for each task. I don't mean adding extra work, just collecting in one place the useful information that we've already exchanged by calls/e-mails . I give you an example below, the level of details can be freely decided. We can also shortly add (in parenthesis) the solution adopted. T.1.1 Hardware setup Description: The robot must be equipped with the following elements: * computer able to run ROS * wireless connection able to connect to the network deployed in T1.9 * videocamera All of these elements must be powered using the robot's or its own boarded power supply. The robot platform, the videocamera and the wireless system must be connected to the computer and all the required drivers must be installed. Outcome: A ready-to-work robot able to stream video and receive teleoperation commands via wireless connection. Actions: TI: [Done] Selection of a Robot (Turtlebot?), installing a WebRTC Client on Robot (Chrome), Installing an App Server (NodeJs) and Kurento Client. Testing a Wireless WebRTC connection between Robot / Kurento Client (WiFi?); [In Progress]... ET: ... In this way we'll have: - The shared Google Doc FIROS-RCM as source for the Open Specs / Open API FIWARE deliverable - The shared Doc WorkPlan as source for Live Demos document and Jira Story/WorkItem . Possibly also useful to define some of Unit Tests (FIWARE deliverable requested at M13 for all features). Interaction with other GEs owners is welcomed, but likely we don't have much feedback, apart to specific answers to specific technical questions. Possibly this list of actions might also help to address technical question/issues to other GEs. Best, Gianmario ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telecom Italia Gianmario Bollano Innovation - Mobile Devices & Sim Applications Via Reiss Romoli, n? 274 Cap 10151 Torino Phone 011 228 7103 Cell Phone 3316015048 Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From davide.colombatto at telecomitalia.it Tue May 12 15:20:14 2015 From: davide.colombatto at telecomitalia.it (Colombatto Davide) Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 13:20:14 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Kurento KAS + webpages Message-ID: <069906BED271EB4A883BD9578DCDD3540CB33DB9@TELMBA006RM001.telecomitalia.local> Hi I?igo, when I did my test I used the KAS implemented in NodeJS (kurento-one2many-call of the tutorials) with little modifications (i.e. some of these modifications are that you advised to Luis). I attach my configuration in the email and you can find the KAS code at https://jolnas.myqnapcloud.com/owncloud/public.php?service=files&t=af75683e9342a003c73db4bc9d904592 (password is "robotics"): to use it you have to change in the server.js the ws_uri with your KMS_public_ip (FIWARE-Lab has deleted that I used). HTML web-pages KAS also works as "Host-Server" which exposes the web-pages required for the WebRTC Clients (e.g. Google Chrome browsers): ? Kurento-master (which will send the video) uses the web-page index.html (accessible at "http://KAS_public_ip:port") ? Kurento-viewers (which will see the video) use the web-page viewer.html (accessible at "http://KAS_public_ip:port/viewer.html) N.B. these web-pages are simply created splitting the originally unique page (index.html) of the tutorial (kurento-one2many-call) in order to have two different web-pages: one for the Kurento-master and the other for the Kurento-viewers. Robot side -Master A .sh ROS node is used to start the WebRTC Client for the Kurento-master (Google Chrome browser) to the web-page index.html: google-chrome "http://KAS_public_ip:port" --use-fake-ui-for-media-stream PC side - Viewers As said above, the viewers can view the video with a Google Chrome browser at the http://KAS_public_ip:port/viewer.html Robustness issues 1. Using this solution I see that sometimes (e.g. when you start many Kurento-viewers or you wrongly try to start more than one Kurento-master) the KAS crashes 2. On my Windows7-PCs work only the solution that use Firefox browsers (working as Master or Viewer) Davide Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Kurento.pptx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation Size: 37916 bytes Desc: Kurento.pptx URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From aarranz at fi.upm.es Tue May 12 15:38:44 2015 From: aarranz at fi.upm.es (=?UTF-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro_Arranz?=) Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 15:38:44 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics Live Demo Work plan In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hi Jaime, we have updated the document (T1.5 and T1.6 tasks) and included some hardware requirements in T1.1 (let us know if they are reasonable). We have also added some tasks on the 2nd and 3rd releases for updating the app. Best regards, ?lvaro On 7 May 2015 at 15:36, Jose Jaime Ariza wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you very much, Luis, I think the description is perfect. Could you > add the related action? (take a look at T1.3 or T1.4). > > If you think the task must be split, please let me know. > > BR, > Pepe. > > > On 06/05/15 17:18, Luis L?pez Fern?ndez wrote: > > Hi Jaime, > > I filled a short paragraph describing the task (T.1.7) under Kurento > responsibility. Let me know if you miss something. > > Best. > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > Luis L?pez Fern?ndez > Subdirector de Investigaci?n y Relaciones con la Empresa > Escuela T?cnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicaci?n > Universidad Rey Juan Carlos > http://www.etsit.urjc.es > e-mail: luis.lopez at urjc.es > Tf1: +34 914 888 747 > Tf2: + 34 914 888 713 > > > > > > > El 30/04/2015, a las 15:17, Jose Jaime Ariza > escribi?: > > Hi Kurento and Wirecloud guys, > > We are developing a workplan for the robotics live demo: > > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qYa9UQcx1kGgQF07MUvlfM0P9NK5j2u8d2cAarKIlLY/edit#heading=h.f7mi0tl88him > Please, have a look and provide any comment you think necessary. > > We are expanding the descriptions of the tasks and adding its outcomes. > Could you take in charge of those related with Kurento and Wirecloud. > > Thank you very much, > Pepe. > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > > > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer+34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Tue May 12 18:46:38 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 18:46:38 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics Live Demo Work plan References: Message-ID: Hi, Thank you very much. I've made some changes and included some annotation in order to merge the two new tasks. We are in process of adding time estimations to the tasks so I would be grateful if you could add those to your tasks. BR, Pepe. On 12/05/15 15:39, ?lvaro Arranz wrote: Hi Jaime, we have updated the document (T1.5 and T1.6 tasks) and included some hardware requirements in T1.1 (let us know if they are reasonable). We have also added some tasks on the 2nd and 3rd releases for updating the app. Best regards, ?lvaro On 7 May 2015 at 15:36, Jose Jaime Ariza > wrote: Hi, Thank you very much, Luis, I think the description is perfect. Could you add the related action? (take a look at T1.3 or T1.4). If you think the task must be split, please let me know. BR, Pepe. On 06/05/15 17:18, Luis L?pez Fern?ndez wrote: Hi Jaime, I filled a short paragraph describing the task (T.1.7) under Kurento responsibility. Let me know if you miss something. Best. ----------------------------------------------------------- Luis L?pez Fern?ndez Subdirector de Investigaci?n y Relaciones con la Empresa Escuela T?cnica Superior de Ingenieros de Telecomunicaci?n Universidad Rey Juan Carlos http://www.etsit.urjc.es e-mail: luis.lopez at urjc.es Tf1: +34 914 888 747 Tf2: + 34 914 888 713 El 30/04/2015, a las 15:17, Jose Jaime Ariza > escribi?: Hi Kurento and Wirecloud guys, We are developing a workplan for the robotics live demo: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qYa9UQcx1kGgQF07MUvlfM0P9NK5j2u8d2cAarKIlLY/edit#heading=h.f7mi0tl88him Please, have a look and provide any comment you think necessary. We are expanding the descriptions of the tasks and adding its outcomes. Could you take in charge of those related with Kurento and Wirecloud. Thank you very much, Pepe. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it Wed May 13 15:21:47 2015 From: roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it (Antonini Roberto) Date: Wed, 13 May 2015 13:21:47 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D50ABB@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Hi all, Just to try to summarize what we discussed yesterday and the two different positions: ? ET claims that FIWARE application developers won?t use Robotics GE, if we provide them with lot of attributes (ROS topics), the most of which will be never used. ? TI claims that we need to provide FIWARE application developers with the most flexibility for building new application, hence it will be the developer who will select the attributes/topics to update or be notified with. The unawareness of ROS and all this topics/attributes is directly proportioned to the API level, not to a-priori filtering. Starting from this two different positions, what we agreed was: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? If so, I would ask you to please add to the architecture in the WIKI page the API for managing this filtering at developer level. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: gioved? 7 maggio 2015 15:18 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi, as we talk in the call, here yo have what we talked about in the last call, I explain why we should use the 2 level filter and answer the points that were asked in the call: Proposal The robotics GE?s main objective is to make easy for users the robot managing. Most of those users are common developers that have development knowledges but no knowledge in robotics, so to make an easy and user friendly integration of FIWARE + robots we have thought that FIROS + RCM Generic enabler should have a 2 level filter: RCM - Application level filter RCM will filter the topics that aren?t necessary for the user, for example those used only in navigation algorithms like happens with the cloud of points. This is quite important for the common user, because this filter will reduce the amount of topics he will be notificated of, making easier to know which topics are important to interact with the robot. When RCM is going to bring up the robot with its configuration, a kobuki for example, it knows that it should bring up a kinect (or a laser), a mobile base and navigation algorithms. Many of the topics generated aren?t necessary for user interaction and/or aren?t compatible with the contextbroker, so if the robot contains topics of this type (not necessary for user or not CB compatible) it won?t send them to FIROS. So this filter will be an application level filter and the user shouldn?t touch it. If a user wants to change this configuration (something not recommended) RCM shall provide an API to override the configuration as it is done in FIROS. RCM should filter the topics as it is configured to, but if the users send to the api new filter rules, the new ones should overwrite the default ones. FIROS - User Level filter In the other hand firos has a robot ? topic whitelist. This list will be a user level filter, where the user defines the robot and the topics he wants publish or listen to. This whitelist supports regular expressions so a user can connect with more topics writing less. With this solution RCM will send to FIROS the topics that the user can use (sending all has no sense, because the user can?t do anything with them). And the user will select from this list which ones will use. Comments from the talk Use a blacklist instead a whitelist The user will use less topics that the ones that won?t be used so using a whitelist the user will have to configure less things. RCM sends all the topics and the user should say which ones aren?t compatible with CB If a user that is not familiar with robotics have to check each messages? format and size to change the configuration no one will use the robotics GE, because configuring one robot would take lots of hours, a kobuki with a kinect brings up at least 30 topics, as is said check the format and size (the size can be different depending on content) of each one can take hours or days of work. To give flexibility RCM will send all the topics to Firos and it will filter them This is not a good idea, FIROS doesn?t know about robots, so it shouldn?t know what things it has to filter, but RCM knows which things are brought up, so RCM should filter some thing. If it would be necessary in some moment to have access to other topics RCM will provide of an api to change the filter as is said before. FIROS have this implemented for the user level filter, it has a file where the user adds the robots and the topics, but it haves a rest api that overwrites this configuration, so if a user only configures FIROS to publish to goal, and after that adds the teleop using the api it will listen to both of topics. So RCM should do the same, by default send only the topics needed by the user and if the user needs more he will ask for them. RCM should publish all the topics, since the user maybe wants to use ros via rosbridge Rosbridge is a ros tools and is independent to firos and RCM, if a user wants to work with rosbridge it won't go through FIROS and RCM, so FIROS and RCM don?t need any change to allow a user to use rosbridge. Regards, I?igo Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From davide.colombatto at telecomitalia.it Thu May 14 14:24:41 2015 From: davide.colombatto at telecomitalia.it (Colombatto Davide) Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 12:24:41 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE In-Reply-To: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D50ABB@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> References: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D50ABB@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <069906BED271EB4A883BD9578DCDD3540CB34896@TELMBA006RM001.telecomitalia.local> Hi all, In order to integrate what Roberto asked you (ET), in the Google shared doc (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eWO5MYYkjJEo1xLLm2YsX_bhCnET5eX4dm4_cL9MFg0/edit#), now called OpenSpec draft, we added two new sections: Robotics GE requirements and APIs. The external APIs implemented by RCM (RDAPI) are mainly four REST-APIs (which return JSON responses) exposed on port 80 of the RCM_MASTER; these APIS performs the following functions (as depicted in https://forge.fiware.org/plugins/mediawiki/wiki/fiwarei2nd/index.php/FIWARE.ArchitectureDescription.I2ND.Robotics#Main_Interactions): ? Read provisioned Service Logics o TBD on Release 4.4 ? Read platform (i.e. provisioned Robots) ? Read Service Space o Since a Service Space is a ?Robot Clone?, the name of the Service Space is the same of the name of the managed Robot (i.e. the Robot name) ? Provisioning of a new service logic o TBD on Release 4.4 ? Provisioning of a new robot o Nowadays this only accept the Robot name but it will also accept the service logic name (Release 4.4) Question to ET As we wrote on page 4 of the OpenSpec draft (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1eWO5MYYkjJEo1xLLm2YsX_bhCnET5eX4dm4_cL9MFg0/edit#): To correctly notify Robot disconnection events to FIROS, FIROS and RCM Driver nodes have to run on the same side of the distributed environment: Server (MASTER or VM) or Robot. The Server-side is recommended due to it is easier that a Robot loses the connection to the CB and FIROS will be not more able to remove the related entity. The version of FIROS that we use for the first demo (February 14) receives the CB notifications listening on a hard-coded port (i.e. the port 10100). In the case of many FIROS instances run on the same machine (e.g. MASTER) they obviously cannot use the same port. How do you manage this situation? Does FIROS firstly tries to use the port 10100 and then (if this port Is busy) it tries the following ones? Or in the first demo (where we probably will use two robots) do you think to have two identically service logics provisioned but one with FIROS on port 10100 and the other on another port (e.g. 10101)? Davide Da: Antonini Roberto Inviato: mercoled? 13 maggio 2015 15:22 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Cc: Colombatto Davide; I?igo Gonzalez Oggetto: R: 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi all, Just to try to summarize what we discussed yesterday and the two different positions: ? ET claims that FIWARE application developers won?t use Robotics GE, if we provide them with lot of attributes (ROS topics), the most of which will be never used. ? TI claims that we need to provide FIWARE application developers with the most flexibility for building new application, hence it will be the developer who will select the attributes/topics to update or be notified with. The unawareness of ROS and all this topics/attributes is directly proportioned to the API level, not to a-priori filtering. Starting from this two different positions, what we agreed was: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? If so, I would ask you to please add to the architecture in the WIKI page the API for managing this filtering at developer level. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: gioved? 7 maggio 2015 15:18 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi, as we talk in the call, here yo have what we talked about in the last call, I explain why we should use the 2 level filter and answer the points that were asked in the call: Proposal The robotics GE?s main objective is to make easy for users the robot managing. Most of those users are common developers that have development knowledges but no knowledge in robotics, so to make an easy and user friendly integration of FIWARE + robots we have thought that FIROS + RCM Generic enabler should have a 2 level filter: RCM - Application level filter RCM will filter the topics that aren?t necessary for the user, for example those used only in navigation algorithms like happens with the cloud of points. This is quite important for the common user, because this filter will reduce the amount of topics he will be notificated of, making easier to know which topics are important to interact with the robot. When RCM is going to bring up the robot with its configuration, a kobuki for example, it knows that it should bring up a kinect (or a laser), a mobile base and navigation algorithms. Many of the topics generated aren?t necessary for user interaction and/or aren?t compatible with the contextbroker, so if the robot contains topics of this type (not necessary for user or not CB compatible) it won?t send them to FIROS. So this filter will be an application level filter and the user shouldn?t touch it. If a user wants to change this configuration (something not recommended) RCM shall provide an API to override the configuration as it is done in FIROS. RCM should filter the topics as it is configured to, but if the users send to the api new filter rules, the new ones should overwrite the default ones. FIROS - User Level filter In the other hand firos has a robot ? topic whitelist. This list will be a user level filter, where the user defines the robot and the topics he wants publish or listen to. This whitelist supports regular expressions so a user can connect with more topics writing less. With this solution RCM will send to FIROS the topics that the user can use (sending all has no sense, because the user can?t do anything with them). And the user will select from this list which ones will use. Comments from the talk Use a blacklist instead a whitelist The user will use less topics that the ones that won?t be used so using a whitelist the user will have to configure less things. RCM sends all the topics and the user should say which ones aren?t compatible with CB If a user that is not familiar with robotics have to check each messages? format and size to change the configuration no one will use the robotics GE, because configuring one robot would take lots of hours, a kobuki with a kinect brings up at least 30 topics, as is said check the format and size (the size can be different depending on content) of each one can take hours or days of work. To give flexibility RCM will send all the topics to Firos and it will filter them This is not a good idea, FIROS doesn?t know about robots, so it shouldn?t know what things it has to filter, but RCM knows which things are brought up, so RCM should filter some thing. If it would be necessary in some moment to have access to other topics RCM will provide of an api to change the filter as is said before. FIROS have this implemented for the user level filter, it has a file where the user adds the robots and the topics, but it haves a rest api that overwrites this configuration, so if a user only configures FIROS to publish to goal, and after that adds the teleop using the api it will listen to both of topics. So RCM should do the same, by default send only the topics needed by the user and if the user needs more he will ask for them. RCM should publish all the topics, since the user maybe wants to use ros via rosbridge Rosbridge is a ros tools and is independent to firos and RCM, if a user wants to work with rosbridge it won't go through FIROS and RCM, so FIROS and RCM don?t need any change to allow a user to use rosbridge. Regards, I?igo Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Thu May 14 15:30:36 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Thu, 14 May 2015 13:30:36 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE In-Reply-To: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D50ABB@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> References: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D50ABB@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C1E00@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi All, thank you all for the different contributions, e-mails and the discussion in the last call. We have considered constraints, usage, technical issues for the Robotics GE. We made hypothesis and proposals based on our reciprocal experience, and we put effort in our analysis. But we still do not have direct feedback from users/groups potentially interested in the Robotics GE. Then, for now we don?t know which might be the best solution. I would suggest, as Roberto has proposed, to adopt the simplest working solution. We need now the best effort solution, to enable the implementation of the live demos. In this moment it appears that the Whitelist filtering (user level), implemented in FIROS, is not only the straight solution, but also the one able to work, without further changes, for the live demos. After the live demos further feedback might come, from GE users of from other groups. We?ll be able to apply refinement after feedbacks, taking into account also the available resources. I really want to stick to ?Occam?s razor principle?: if we cannot weight alternatives, choose the simplest available one. The FIROS User level Whitelist also implies the presence of API; as suggested by Roberto and Pier (please see the Robotics call minutes), it?s important to provide documentation in the Robotics Architecture page, which now only shows the RDAPI of RCM and CBAPI of FIROS. Please, specify if the Filtering in FIROS needs further API besides CBAPI, and write few line to describe them (more detailed description will be provided in the Open API Deliverable). We will have to publish the Architecture very shortly, then I would ask and remind you to update the FIROS API in the block diagram and text, as soon as possible. BR, Gianmario Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Antonini Roberto Inviato: mercoled? 13 maggio 2015 15:22 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi all, Just to try to summarize what we discussed yesterday and the two different positions: ? ET claims that FIWARE application developers won?t use Robotics GE, if we provide them with lot of attributes (ROS topics), the most of which will be never used. ? TI claims that we need to provide FIWARE application developers with the most flexibility for building new application, hence it will be the developer who will select the attributes/topics to update or be notified with. The unawareness of ROS and all this topics/attributes is directly proportioned to the API level, not to a-priori filtering. Starting from this two different positions, what we agreed was: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? If so, I would ask you to please add to the architecture in the WIKI page the API for managing this filtering at developer level. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: gioved? 7 maggio 2015 15:18 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi, as we talk in the call, here yo have what we talked about in the last call, I explain why we should use the 2 level filter and answer the points that were asked in the call: Proposal The robotics GE?s main objective is to make easy for users the robot managing. Most of those users are common developers that have development knowledges but no knowledge in robotics, so to make an easy and user friendly integration of FIWARE + robots we have thought that FIROS + RCM Generic enabler should have a 2 level filter: RCM - Application level filter RCM will filter the topics that aren?t necessary for the user, for example those used only in navigation algorithms like happens with the cloud of points. This is quite important for the common user, because this filter will reduce the amount of topics he will be notificated of, making easier to know which topics are important to interact with the robot. When RCM is going to bring up the robot with its configuration, a kobuki for example, it knows that it should bring up a kinect (or a laser), a mobile base and navigation algorithms. Many of the topics generated aren?t necessary for user interaction and/or aren?t compatible with the contextbroker, so if the robot contains topics of this type (not necessary for user or not CB compatible) it won?t send them to FIROS. So this filter will be an application level filter and the user shouldn?t touch it. If a user wants to change this configuration (something not recommended) RCM shall provide an API to override the configuration as it is done in FIROS. RCM should filter the topics as it is configured to, but if the users send to the api new filter rules, the new ones should overwrite the default ones. FIROS - User Level filter In the other hand firos has a robot ? topic whitelist. This list will be a user level filter, where the user defines the robot and the topics he wants publish or listen to. This whitelist supports regular expressions so a user can connect with more topics writing less. With this solution RCM will send to FIROS the topics that the user can use (sending all has no sense, because the user can?t do anything with them). And the user will select from this list which ones will use. Comments from the talk Use a blacklist instead a whitelist The user will use less topics that the ones that won?t be used so using a whitelist the user will have to configure less things. RCM sends all the topics and the user should say which ones aren?t compatible with CB If a user that is not familiar with robotics have to check each messages? format and size to change the configuration no one will use the robotics GE, because configuring one robot would take lots of hours, a kobuki with a kinect brings up at least 30 topics, as is said check the format and size (the size can be different depending on content) of each one can take hours or days of work. To give flexibility RCM will send all the topics to Firos and it will filter them This is not a good idea, FIROS doesn?t know about robots, so it shouldn?t know what things it has to filter, but RCM knows which things are brought up, so RCM should filter some thing. If it would be necessary in some moment to have access to other topics RCM will provide of an api to change the filter as is said before. FIROS have this implemented for the user level filter, it has a file where the user adds the robots and the topics, but it haves a rest api that overwrites this configuration, so if a user only configures FIROS to publish to goal, and after that adds the teleop using the api it will listen to both of topics. So RCM should do the same, by default send only the topics needed by the user and if the user needs more he will ask for them. RCM should publish all the topics, since the user maybe wants to use ros via rosbridge Rosbridge is a ros tools and is independent to firos and RCM, if a user wants to work with rosbridge it won't go through FIROS and RCM, so FIROS and RCM don?t need any change to allow a user to use rosbridge. Regards, I?igo Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 677 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Fri May 15 15:20:07 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 15:20:07 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE References: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D50ABB@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C1E00@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: Hi All, Roberto, about this assertion: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? I don't think we've reached to an agreement yet. We, as Gianmario says, must adopt the simplest working solution, but from the users point of view, not ours. So I still think we must shorten the number of attributes we make available to contextBroker by having a coarse filtration in RCM (call it whitelist or blacklist). Of course, FIROS is perfectly able to work without RCM filtration, so we can run our live demos without the secondary filtering, but I still think that this is not the ideal aproach: our GE must provide the 2-level filtering. We'll add the required API documentation and improve the architecture description ASAP. We've made some comments in the minutes (28 April '15 and 5 May '15) in order to correct some innacuracies we found, please have a look at them. BR, Pepe. On 14/05/15 15:32, Bollano Gianmario wrote: Hi All, thank you all for the different contributions, e-mails and the discussion in the last call. We have considered constraints, usage, technical issues for the Robotics GE. We made hypothesis and proposals based on our reciprocal experience, and we put effort in our analysis. But we still do not have direct feedback from users/groups potentially interested in the Robotics GE. Then, for now we don?t know which might be the best solution. I would suggest, as Roberto has proposed, to adopt the simplest working solution. We need now the best effort solution, to enable the implementation of the live demos. In this moment it appears that the Whitelist filtering (user level), implemented in FIROS, is not only the straight solution, but also the one able to work, without further changes, for the live demos. After the live demos further feedback might come, from GE users of from other groups. We?ll be able to apply refinement after feedbacks, taking into account also the available resources. I really want to stick to ?Occam?s razor principle?: if we cannot weight alternatives, choose the simplest available one. The FIROS User level Whitelist also implies the presence of API; as suggested by Roberto and Pier (please see the Robotics call minutes), it?s important to provide documentation in the Robotics Architecture page, which now only shows the RDAPI of RCM and CBAPI of FIROS. Please, specify if the Filtering in FIROS needs further API besides CBAPI, and write few line to describe them (more detailed description will be provided in the Open API Deliverable). We will have to publish the Architecture very shortly, then I would ask and remind you to update the FIROS API in the block diagram and text, as soon as possible. BR, Gianmario Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Antonini Roberto Inviato: mercoled? 13 maggio 2015 15:22 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi all, Just to try to summarize what we discussed yesterday and the two different positions: ? ET claims that FIWARE application developers won?t use Robotics GE, if we provide them with lot of attributes (ROS topics), the most of which will be never used. ? TI claims that we need to provide FIWARE application developers with the most flexibility for building new application, hence it will be the developer who will select the attributes/topics to update or be notified with. The unawareness of ROS and all this topics/attributes is directly proportioned to the API level, not to a-priori filtering. Starting from this two different positions, what we agreed was: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? If so, I would ask you to please add to the architecture in the WIKI page the API for managing this filtering at developer level. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: gioved? 7 maggio 2015 15:18 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi, as we talk in the call, here yo have what we talked about in the last call, I explain why we should use the 2 level filter and answer the points that were asked in the call: Proposal The robotics GE?s main objective is to make easy for users the robot managing. Most of those users are common developers that have development knowledges but no knowledge in robotics, so to make an easy and user friendly integration of FIWARE + robots we have thought that FIROS + RCM Generic enabler should have a 2 level filter: RCM - Application level filter RCM will filter the topics that aren?t necessary for the user, for example those used only in navigation algorithms like happens with the cloud of points. This is quite important for the common user, because this filter will reduce the amount of topics he will be notificated of, making easier to know which topics are important to interact with the robot. When RCM is going to bring up the robot with its configuration, a kobuki for example, it knows that it should bring up a kinect (or a laser), a mobile base and navigation algorithms. Many of the topics generated aren?t necessary for user interaction and/or aren?t compatible with the contextbroker, so if the robot contains topics of this type (not necessary for user or not CB compatible) it won?t send them to FIROS. So this filter will be an application level filter and the user shouldn?t touch it. If a user wants to change this configuration (something not recommended) RCM shall provide an API to override the configuration as it is done in FIROS. RCM should filter the topics as it is configured to, but if the users send to the api new filter rules, the new ones should overwrite the default ones. FIROS - User Level filter In the other hand firos has a robot ? topic whitelist. This list will be a user level filter, where the user defines the robot and the topics he wants publish or listen to. This whitelist supports regular expressions so a user can connect with more topics writing less. With this solution RCM will send to FIROS the topics that the user can use (sending all has no sense, because the user can?t do anything with them). And the user will select from this list which ones will use. Comments from the talk Use a blacklist instead a whitelist The user will use less topics that the ones that won?t be used so using a whitelist the user will have to configure less things. RCM sends all the topics and the user should say which ones aren?t compatible with CB If a user that is not familiar with robotics have to check each messages? format and size to change the configuration no one will use the robotics GE, because configuring one robot would take lots of hours, a kobuki with a kinect brings up at least 30 topics, as is said check the format and size (the size can be different depending on content) of each one can take hours or days of work. To give flexibility RCM will send all the topics to Firos and it will filter them This is not a good idea, FIROS doesn?t know about robots, so it shouldn?t know what things it has to filter, but RCM knows which things are brought up, so RCM should filter some thing. If it would be necessary in some moment to have access to other topics RCM will provide of an api to change the filter as is said before. FIROS have this implemented for the user level filter, it has a file where the user adds the robots and the topics, but it haves a rest api that overwrites this configuration, so if a user only configures FIROS to publish to goal, and after that adds the teleop using the api it will listen to both of topics. So RCM should do the same, by default send only the topics needed by the user and if the user needs more he will ask for them. RCM should publish all the topics, since the user maybe wants to use ros via rosbridge Rosbridge is a ros tools and is independent to firos and RCM, if a user wants to work with rosbridge it won't go through FIROS and RCM, so FIROS and RCM don?t need any change to allow a user to use rosbridge. Regards, I?igo Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. []Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Fri May 15 16:27:59 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Fri, 15 May 2015 14:27:59 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: 2 level filter for robotics GE In-Reply-To: References: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D50ABB@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C1E00@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C26C4@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi Pepe, All, I ?ve added my comments inline. BR, Gianmario Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: venerd? 15 maggio 2015 15:20 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: Re: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi All, Roberto, about this assertion: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? I don't think we've reached to an agreement yet. We, as Gianmario says, must adopt the simplest working solution, but from the users point of view, not ours. So I still think we must shorten the number of attributes we make available to contextBroker by having a coarse filtration in RCM (call it whitelist or blacklist). Of course, FIROS is perfectly able to work without RCM filtration, so we can run our live demos without the secondary filtering, but I still think that this is not the ideal aproach: our GE must provide the 2-level filtering. We have not yet reached a shared ?ideal approach? for filtering, but we have an agreement on the simplest working solution. The complexity lies in the definition of ? let me say ? metarules for filtering, e.g. which rules to use for defining the rules to generate filtering, depending on the applications requirements, user needs, robotics use and purposes. This is what Roberto called the (nonlocal) ?a priory? knowledge. Well, in few words, this will imply also a knowledge of the Robotics GE early adopters (expertise, feedback, design approach, app types) that we don?t have yet. We'll add the required API documentation and improve the architecture description ASAP. Good. Considering these API are agreed and strictly required for all live demos, we need to add them before the imminent release of the first architecture deliverable. We've made some comments in the minutes (28 April '15 and 5 May '15) in order to correct some innacuracies we found, please have a look at them. Comments are always welcomed. Minutes are just snapshots of evolving definitions. We wrote them while the discussion was going on, and subsequent actions have added or evolved these information. I would suggest you to check also the shared Robotics document (renamed Robotics GE - OpenSpec draft ) and put there notes and suggestions for technical aspects to be shared. Specifically, that document is the one that defines the common agreed assumptions for RCM-FIROS and will become the official deliverable. BR, Pepe. On 14/05/15 15:32, Bollano Gianmario wrote: Hi All, thank you all for the different contributions, e-mails and the discussion in the last call. We have considered constraints, usage, technical issues for the Robotics GE. We made hypothesis and proposals based on our reciprocal experience, and we put effort in our analysis. But we still do not have direct feedback from users/groups potentially interested in the Robotics GE. Then, for now we don?t know which might be the best solution. I would suggest, as Roberto has proposed, to adopt the simplest working solution. We need now the best effort solution, to enable the implementation of the live demos. In this moment it appears that the Whitelist filtering (user level), implemented in FIROS, is not only the straight solution, but also the one able to work, without further changes, for the live demos. After the live demos further feedback might come, from GE users of from other groups. We?ll be able to apply refinement after feedbacks, taking into account also the available resources. I really want to stick to ?Occam?s razor principle?: if we cannot weight alternatives, choose the simplest available one. The FIROS User level Whitelist also implies the presence of API; as suggested by Roberto and Pier (please see the Robotics call minutes), it?s important to provide documentation in the Robotics Architecture page, which now only shows the RDAPI of RCM and CBAPI of FIROS. Please, specify if the Filtering in FIROS needs further API besides CBAPI, and write few line to describe them (more detailed description will be provided in the Open API Deliverable). We will have to publish the Architecture very shortly, then I would ask and remind you to update the FIROS API in the block diagram and text, as soon as possible. BR, Gianmario Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Antonini Roberto Inviato: mercoled? 13 maggio 2015 15:22 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi all, Just to try to summarize what we discussed yesterday and the two different positions: ? ET claims that FIWARE application developers won?t use Robotics GE, if we provide them with lot of attributes (ROS topics), the most of which will be never used. ? TI claims that we need to provide FIWARE application developers with the most flexibility for building new application, hence it will be the developer who will select the attributes/topics to update or be notified with. The unawareness of ROS and all this topics/attributes is directly proportioned to the API level, not to a-priori filtering. Starting from this two different positions, what we agreed was: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? If so, I would ask you to please add to the architecture in the WIKI page the API for managing this filtering at developer level. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: gioved? 7 maggio 2015 15:18 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi, as we talk in the call, here yo have what we talked about in the last call, I explain why we should use the 2 level filter and answer the points that were asked in the call: Proposal The robotics GE?s main objective is to make easy for users the robot managing. Most of those users are common developers that have development knowledges but no knowledge in robotics, so to make an easy and user friendly integration of FIWARE + robots we have thought that FIROS + RCM Generic enabler should have a 2 level filter: RCM - Application level filter RCM will filter the topics that aren?t necessary for the user, for example those used only in navigation algorithms like happens with the cloud of points. This is quite important for the common user, because this filter will reduce the amount of topics he will be notificated of, making easier to know which topics are important to interact with the robot. When RCM is going to bring up the robot with its configuration, a kobuki for example, it knows that it should bring up a kinect (or a laser), a mobile base and navigation algorithms. Many of the topics generated aren?t necessary for user interaction and/or aren?t compatible with the contextbroker, so if the robot contains topics of this type (not necessary for user or not CB compatible) it won?t send them to FIROS. So this filter will be an application level filter and the user shouldn?t touch it. If a user wants to change this configuration (something not recommended) RCM shall provide an API to override the configuration as it is done in FIROS. RCM should filter the topics as it is configured to, but if the users send to the api new filter rules, the new ones should overwrite the default ones. FIROS - User Level filter In the other hand firos has a robot ? topic whitelist. This list will be a user level filter, where the user defines the robot and the topics he wants publish or listen to. This whitelist supports regular expressions so a user can connect with more topics writing less. With this solution RCM will send to FIROS the topics that the user can use (sending all has no sense, because the user can?t do anything with them). And the user will select from this list which ones will use. Comments from the talk Use a blacklist instead a whitelist The user will use less topics that the ones that won?t be used so using a whitelist the user will have to configure less things. RCM sends all the topics and the user should say which ones aren?t compatible with CB If a user that is not familiar with robotics have to check each messages? format and size to change the configuration no one will use the robotics GE, because configuring one robot would take lots of hours, a kobuki with a kinect brings up at least 30 topics, as is said check the format and size (the size can be different depending on content) of each one can take hours or days of work. To give flexibility RCM will send all the topics to Firos and it will filter them This is not a good idea, FIROS doesn?t know about robots, so it shouldn?t know what things it has to filter, but RCM knows which things are brought up, so RCM should filter some thing. If it would be necessary in some moment to have access to other topics RCM will provide of an api to change the filter as is said before. FIROS have this implemented for the user level filter, it has a file where the user adds the robots and the topics, but it haves a rest api that overwrites this configuration, so if a user only configures FIROS to publish to goal, and after that adds the teleop using the api it will listen to both of topics. So RCM should do the same, by default send only the topics needed by the user and if the user needs more he will ask for them. RCM should publish all the topics, since the user maybe wants to use ros via rosbridge Rosbridge is a ros tools and is independent to firos and RCM, if a user wants to work with rosbridge it won't go through FIROS and RCM, so FIROS and RCM don?t need any change to allow a user to use rosbridge. Regards, I?igo Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it Mon May 18 09:19:04 2015 From: roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it (Antonini Roberto) Date: Mon, 18 May 2015 07:19:04 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: R: 2 level filter for robotics GE In-Reply-To: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C26C4@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> References: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D50ABB@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C1E00@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C26C4@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D52414@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Hi Pepe, all Apologize if I simplified too much our discussion, my intention wasn?t to put unsaid words in your mouth, but to understand if a convergence was reached. For the remnant, I agree on what Gianmario told us. Thanks, R Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Bollano Gianmario Inviato: venerd? 15 maggio 2015 16:28 A: Jose Jaime Ariza; fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi Pepe, All, I ?ve added my comments inline. BR, Gianmario Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: venerd? 15 maggio 2015 15:20 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: Re: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi All, Roberto, about this assertion: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? I don't think we've reached to an agreement yet. We, as Gianmario says, must adopt the simplest working solution, but from the users point of view, not ours. So I still think we must shorten the number of attributes we make available to contextBroker by having a coarse filtration in RCM (call it whitelist or blacklist). Of course, FIROS is perfectly able to work without RCM filtration, so we can run our live demos without the secondary filtering, but I still think that this is not the ideal aproach: our GE must provide the 2-level filtering. We have not yet reached a shared ?ideal approach? for filtering, but we have an agreement on the simplest working solution. The complexity lies in the definition of ? let me say ? metarules for filtering, e.g. which rules to use for defining the rules to generate filtering, depending on the applications requirements, user needs, robotics use and purposes. This is what Roberto called the (nonlocal) ?a priory? knowledge. Well, in few words, this will imply also a knowledge of the Robotics GE early adopters (expertise, feedback, design approach, app types) that we don?t have yet. We'll add the required API documentation and improve the architecture description ASAP. Good. Considering these API are agreed and strictly required for all live demos, we need to add them before the imminent release of the first architecture deliverable. We've made some comments in the minutes (28 April '15 and 5 May '15) in order to correct some innacuracies we found, please have a look at them. Comments are always welcomed. Minutes are just snapshots of evolving definitions. We wrote them while the discussion was going on, and subsequent actions have added or evolved these information. I would suggest you to check also the shared Robotics document (renamed Robotics GE - OpenSpec draft ) and put there notes and suggestions for technical aspects to be shared. Specifically, that document is the one that defines the common agreed assumptions for RCM-FIROS and will become the official deliverable. BR, Pepe. On 14/05/15 15:32, Bollano Gianmario wrote: Hi All, thank you all for the different contributions, e-mails and the discussion in the last call. We have considered constraints, usage, technical issues for the Robotics GE. We made hypothesis and proposals based on our reciprocal experience, and we put effort in our analysis. But we still do not have direct feedback from users/groups potentially interested in the Robotics GE. Then, for now we don?t know which might be the best solution. I would suggest, as Roberto has proposed, to adopt the simplest working solution. We need now the best effort solution, to enable the implementation of the live demos. In this moment it appears that the Whitelist filtering (user level), implemented in FIROS, is not only the straight solution, but also the one able to work, without further changes, for the live demos. After the live demos further feedback might come, from GE users of from other groups. We?ll be able to apply refinement after feedbacks, taking into account also the available resources. I really want to stick to ?Occam?s razor principle?: if we cannot weight alternatives, choose the simplest available one. The FIROS User level Whitelist also implies the presence of API; as suggested by Roberto and Pier (please see the Robotics call minutes), it?s important to provide documentation in the Robotics Architecture page, which now only shows the RDAPI of RCM and CBAPI of FIROS. Please, specify if the Filtering in FIROS needs further API besides CBAPI, and write few line to describe them (more detailed description will be provided in the Open API Deliverable). We will have to publish the Architecture very shortly, then I would ask and remind you to update the FIROS API in the block diagram and text, as soon as possible. BR, Gianmario Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Antonini Roberto Inviato: mercoled? 13 maggio 2015 15:22 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] R: 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi all, Just to try to summarize what we discussed yesterday and the two different positions: ? ET claims that FIWARE application developers won?t use Robotics GE, if we provide them with lot of attributes (ROS topics), the most of which will be never used. ? TI claims that we need to provide FIWARE application developers with the most flexibility for building new application, hence it will be the developer who will select the attributes/topics to update or be notified with. The unawareness of ROS and all this topics/attributes is directly proportioned to the API level, not to a-priori filtering. Starting from this two different positions, what we agreed was: FIROS will be in charge to filter out ROS topics by applying a white list, that is compiled from developer (what you defined as FIROS User Level Filter) and RCM will provide FIROS with all ROS topics, is it correct? If so, I would ask you to please add to the architecture in the WIKI page the API for managing this filtering at developer level. BR, Roberto Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: gioved? 7 maggio 2015 15:18 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] 2 level filter for robotics GE Hi, as we talk in the call, here yo have what we talked about in the last call, I explain why we should use the 2 level filter and answer the points that were asked in the call: Proposal The robotics GE?s main objective is to make easy for users the robot managing. Most of those users are common developers that have development knowledges but no knowledge in robotics, so to make an easy and user friendly integration of FIWARE + robots we have thought that FIROS + RCM Generic enabler should have a 2 level filter: RCM - Application level filter RCM will filter the topics that aren?t necessary for the user, for example those used only in navigation algorithms like happens with the cloud of points. This is quite important for the common user, because this filter will reduce the amount of topics he will be notificated of, making easier to know which topics are important to interact with the robot. When RCM is going to bring up the robot with its configuration, a kobuki for example, it knows that it should bring up a kinect (or a laser), a mobile base and navigation algorithms. Many of the topics generated aren?t necessary for user interaction and/or aren?t compatible with the contextbroker, so if the robot contains topics of this type (not necessary for user or not CB compatible) it won?t send them to FIROS. So this filter will be an application level filter and the user shouldn?t touch it. If a user wants to change this configuration (something not recommended) RCM shall provide an API to override the configuration as it is done in FIROS. RCM should filter the topics as it is configured to, but if the users send to the api new filter rules, the new ones should overwrite the default ones. FIROS - User Level filter In the other hand firos has a robot ? topic whitelist. This list will be a user level filter, where the user defines the robot and the topics he wants publish or listen to. This whitelist supports regular expressions so a user can connect with more topics writing less. With this solution RCM will send to FIROS the topics that the user can use (sending all has no sense, because the user can?t do anything with them). And the user will select from this list which ones will use. Comments from the talk Use a blacklist instead a whitelist The user will use less topics that the ones that won?t be used so using a whitelist the user will have to configure less things. RCM sends all the topics and the user should say which ones aren?t compatible with CB If a user that is not familiar with robotics have to check each messages? format and size to change the configuration no one will use the robotics GE, because configuring one robot would take lots of hours, a kobuki with a kinect brings up at least 30 topics, as is said check the format and size (the size can be different depending on content) of each one can take hours or days of work. To give flexibility RCM will send all the topics to Firos and it will filter them This is not a good idea, FIROS doesn?t know about robots, so it shouldn?t know what things it has to filter, but RCM knows which things are brought up, so RCM should filter some thing. If it would be necessary in some moment to have access to other topics RCM will provide of an api to change the filter as is said before. FIROS have this implemented for the user level filter, it has a file where the user adds the robots and the topics, but it haves a rest api that overwrites this configuration, so if a user only configures FIROS to publish to goal, and after that adds the teleop using the api it will listen to both of topics. So RCM should do the same, by default send only the topics needed by the user and if the user needs more he will ask for them. RCM should publish all the topics, since the user maybe wants to use ros via rosbridge Rosbridge is a ros tools and is independent to firos and RCM, if a user wants to work with rosbridge it won't go through FIROS and RCM, so FIROS and RCM don?t need any change to allow a user to use rosbridge. Regards, I?igo Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Tue May 19 09:51:23 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 07:51:23 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics Call Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C3B1C@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Dear all, you are invited to the weekly Robotics phone call (hangout). We will use the same document for Robotics minutes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CAwhNqoMf7KnP_yHjITo2gRrVoWCKMsthiWX3ZWWLHo/edit?pli=1 Best, Gianmario Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 2577 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Wed May 20 18:06:43 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 18:06:43 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] LD and Wirecloud Message-ID: Hi all, We should appoint a call with Wirecloud in order to talk about the tasks of the Live Demo. Could it be next week? What do you (TI and Wirecloud) think about monday or wednesday 10:00? Thank you very much. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Thu May 21 09:03:54 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 07:03:54 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: LD and Wirecloud In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C4A3B@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi all, I've prepared a Doodle to select the preferred date for the Robotics-WireCloud Meeting. The link is: http://doodle.com/zutqbtisn5a2xqsu Best, Gianmario -----Messaggio originale----- Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: mercoled? 20 maggio 2015 18:07 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; aarranz at fi.upm.es; amagan at conwet.com; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; jsoriano at fi.upm.es Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] LD and Wirecloud Hi all, We should appoint a call with Wirecloud in order to talk about the tasks of the Live Demo. Could it be next week? What do you (TI and Wirecloud) think about monday or wednesday 10:00? Thank you very much. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group _______________________________________________ Fiware-robotics mailing list Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. From jjaime at ikergune.com Fri May 22 11:53:36 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 11:53:36 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Roles of partners for robotics LD Message-ID: Hi Ilknur, We are including the role of each partner in our workplan (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1qYa9UQcx1kGgQF07MUvlfM0P9NK5j2u8d2cAarKIlLY/edit#heading=h.f7mi0tl88him). The planning of the part 1 is almost ready and we are working in part 2 and 3. On the whole, for the part 1, these are the main roles: * ET * hardware setup * FIROS configuration and deployment * control interface design * integration and tests * Naevatec * Kurento configuration and deployment * integration and tests * TI * hardware setup * RCM configuration and deployment * environment configuration * integration and tests * URJC * control interface design and implementation * integration and tests BR, Pepe -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Mon May 25 16:06:39 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Mon, 25 May 2015 16:06:39 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: LD and Wirecloud References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C4A3B@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: Hi all, Just as a reminder: we'll have this call next Wednesday (May 27th) at 10:00 CEST. BR. On 21/05/15 09:04, Bollano Gianmario wrote: > Hi all, > I've prepared a Doodle to select the preferred date for the Robotics-WireCloud Meeting. > The link is: > http://doodle.com/zutqbtisn5a2xqsu > > Best, > Gianmario > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza > Inviato: mercoled? 20 maggio 2015 18:07 > A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; aarranz at fi.upm.es; amagan at conwet.com; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; jsoriano at fi.upm.es > Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] LD and Wirecloud > > Hi all, > > We should appoint a call with Wirecloud in order to talk about the tasks of the Live Demo. Could it be next week? What do you (TI and Wirecloud) think about monday or wednesday 10:00? > > Thank you very much. > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware-robotics mailing list > Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics > > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. > > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. > > -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Tue May 26 09:54:36 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 07:54:36 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics call Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F63BFD4E09@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Dear all, you are invited to the weekly Robotics phone call (hangout). The document for Robotics minutes is, as usual: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CAwhNqoMf7KnP_yHjITo2gRrVoWCKMsthiWX3ZWWLHo/edit?pli=1 Best Gianmario Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/calendar Size: 2574 bytes Desc: not available URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Tue May 26 09:57:32 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 09:57:32 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Call with Kurento Message-ID: Hi all, I've scheduled a call with Kurento today at 14:00. Sorry for notifying with so short notice. BR -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group From roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it Tue May 26 10:01:58 2015 From: roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it (Antonini Roberto) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 08:01:58 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: Call with Kurento In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D551CF@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Sorry, but I can't participate for another meeting already scheduled. R -----Messaggio originale----- Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: marted? 26 maggio 2015 09:58 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Call with Kurento Hi all, I've scheduled a call with Kurento today at 14:00. Sorry for notifying with so short notice. BR -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group _______________________________________________ Fiware-robotics mailing list Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. From davide.colombatto at telecomitalia.it Tue May 26 11:32:57 2015 From: davide.colombatto at telecomitalia.it (Colombatto Davide) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 09:32:57 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: Call with Kurento In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <069906BED271EB4A883BD9578DCDD3540CB3AB06@TELMBA006RM001.telecomitalia.local> Sorry, I have a scheduled meeting this afternoon thus I don't know if I will succeed to participate Davide -----Messaggio originale----- Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: marted? 26 maggio 2015 09:58 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Call with Kurento Hi all, I've scheduled a call with Kurento today at 14:00. Sorry for notifying with so short notice. BR -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group _______________________________________________ Fiware-robotics mailing list Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Tue May 26 14:18:54 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 12:18:54 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Architecture Test Robotics Kurento Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F63BFD90A3@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi all, please find the link to a simple slide showing actual configuration with Kurento used for Robotics Demo: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/110H_bSo6QDOgSX9AYxF8fqB7MAoL6Fb_tcnNtIGnBhk/edit?usp=sharing Best, Gianmario ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telecom Italia Gianmario Bollano Innovation - Mobile Devices & Sim Applications Via Reiss Romoli, n? 274 Cap 10151 Torino Phone 011 228 7103 Cell Phone 3316015048 Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Tue May 26 16:31:01 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 14:31:01 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics-Kurento call minutes Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F63BFDA1AE@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi all, please find a short summary of the Robotics-Kurento call. Robotics - Kurento call: ? We should define what are the requirements, e.g. for latency: are we ok with 1/2s latency in our application? Do we need to broadcast the video, or is it used by an operator only? * For the demo purposes, probably the former is more relevant (we can show to many people the robots moving) ? Both Kurento blueprints or images can be used on FIWARE Lab * Suggested to use last image available for Kurento in FIWARE LAB ? Quick instructions: * Open all UDP ports. * Check if Kurento works in a browser. * If it doesn't work (NAT must allow realtime traffic) it may require to install a Turn server in FIWARE lab. In this case, ask further instructions to Luis. ? Different kind of applications available from Kurento repository. The FIWARE Lab image has already several application installed (based on Tomcat on Springboot) then it should be a better solution than blueprint, which doesn't have any application. Applications are open source, so they could be used to derive the required application for our demo ? Application server can be on same machine as KMS or not; in the latter case it is required to open port 8888. Ports for Application server are 80, 8080 etc (HTTP). ? 2 Wirecloud widgets available for Kurento: one used for IP camera stream (not useful if using webkit/chrome), the second is for meeting communication. Perhaps the robot demo could be based on the latter. It is however better to talk to Wirecloud guys about this. Luis, I also enclose below the link with the slide of the configuration of Robotics GE used in the tests with Kurento (I apologize, I sent the link to many people but I missed your e-mail): https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/110H_bSo6QDOgSX9AYxF8fqB7MAoL6Fb_tcnNtIGnBhk/edit?usp=sharing Best, Gianmario ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telecom Italia Gianmario Bollano Innovation - Mobile Devices & Sim Applications Via Reiss Romoli, n? 274 Cap 10151 Torino Phone 011 228 7103 Cell Phone 3316015048 Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 677 bytes Desc: logo Ambiente_foglia2.jpg URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Tue May 26 17:21:38 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 17:21:38 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Port issue summary Message-ID: Hi, I've summarized the port issue and the three proposed solutions in this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ReZKrIxWN5gQLMPsUbmYMqvWiptuAj0AxGr138SAkzU/edit?usp=sharing Please, have a look and change any thing you think necessary. BR. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group From aarranz at fi.upm.es Wed May 27 09:38:10 2015 From: aarranz at fi.upm.es (=?UTF-8?Q?=C3=81lvaro_Arranz?=) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 09:38:10 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: LD and Wirecloud In-Reply-To: References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C4A3B@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: Hi, how are going to connect, using hangouts? Best regards, ?lvaro On 25 May 2015 at 16:06, Jose Jaime Ariza wrote: > Hi all, > > Just as a reminder: we'll have this call next Wednesday (May 27th) at > 10:00 CEST. > > BR. > > On 21/05/15 09:04, Bollano Gianmario wrote: > > Hi all, > > I've prepared a Doodle to select the preferred date for the > Robotics-WireCloud Meeting. > > The link is: > > http://doodle.com/zutqbtisn5a2xqsu > > > > Best, > > Gianmario > > > > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > > Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto: > fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza > > Inviato: mercoled? 20 maggio 2015 18:07 > > A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; aarranz at fi.upm.es; > amagan at conwet.com; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; jsoriano at fi.upm.es > > Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] LD and Wirecloud > > > > Hi all, > > > > We should appoint a call with Wirecloud in order to talk about the tasks > of the Live Demo. Could it be next week? What do you (TI and Wirecloud) > think about monday or wednesday 10:00? > > > > Thank you very much. > > > > -- > > Jos? Jaime Ariza > > R&D Engineer > > +34 696604288 > > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Fiware-robotics mailing list > > Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > > https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics > > > > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle > persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante > dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora > abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di > darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua > distruzione, Grazie. > > > > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain > privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, > copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not > the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and > advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. > > > > > > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it Wed May 27 09:42:08 2015 From: roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it (Antonini Roberto) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 07:42:08 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: Robotics-Kurento call minutes In-Reply-To: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F63BFDA1AE@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F63BFDA1AE@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D558F8@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> Just a quick comment inline (in red), for what concerns the first issues. R Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Bollano Gianmario Inviato: marted? 26 maggio 2015 16:31 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; luis.lopez at urjc.es Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Robotics-Kurento call minutes Hi all, please find a short summary of the Robotics-Kurento call. Robotics - Kurento call: ? We should define what are the requirements, e.g. for latency: are we ok with 1/2s latency in our application? Do we need to broadcast the video, or is it used by an operator only? If we use camera sight as a feedback to move the robot, then 1 or 2 seconds are enough, to operate for that latency I would have to slow down robot ... * For the demo purposes, probably the former is more relevant (we can show to many people the robots moving) I would set two different profiles: ? The operator, who needs fast feedback from the camera (less than 0.5s) ? The viewer(s), who accesses a streaming portal, where above video is usually recasted and codified in different formats The first is the easiest, but if you try to access it as if you were a viewer (second case) you would have scalability issues, I suppose. ? Both Kurento blueprints or images can be used on FIWARE Lab * Suggested to use last image available for Kurento in FIWARE LAB ? Quick instructions: * Open all UDP ports. * Check if Kurento works in a browser. * If it doesn't work (NAT must allow realtime traffic) it may require to install a Turn server in FIWARE lab. In this case, ask further instructions to Luis. ? Different kind of applications available from Kurento repository. The FIWARE Lab image has already several application installed (based on Tomcat on Springboot) then it should be a better solution than blueprint, which doesn't have any application. Applications are open source, so they could be used to derive the required application for our demo ? Application server can be on same machine as KMS or not; in the latter case it is required to open port 8888. Ports for Application server are 80, 8080 etc (HTTP). ? 2 Wirecloud widgets available for Kurento: one used for IP camera stream (not useful if using webkit/chrome), the second is for meeting communication. Perhaps the robot demo could be based on the latter. It is however better to talk to Wirecloud guys about this. Luis, I also enclose below the link with the slide of the configuration of Robotics GE used in the tests with Kurento (I apologize, I sent the link to many people but I missed your e-mail): https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/110H_bSo6QDOgSX9AYxF8fqB7MAoL6Fb_tcnNtIGnBhk/edit?usp=sharing Best, Gianmario ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Telecom Italia Gianmario Bollano Innovation - Mobile Devices & Sim Applications Via Reiss Romoli, n? 274 Cap 10151 Torino Phone 011 228 7103 Cell Phone 3316015048 Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. [rispetta l'ambiente]Rispetta l'ambiente. Non stampare questa mail se non ? necessario. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 677 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: From igonzalez at ikergune.com Wed May 27 09:57:31 2015 From: igonzalez at ikergune.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?I=F1igo_Gonzalez?=) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 09:57:31 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: LD and Wirecloud References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C4A3B@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: Hi, we are going to use hangouts. Regards, i?igo On 27/05/15 09:38, ?lvaro Arranz wrote: Hi, how are going to connect, using hangouts? Best regards, ?lvaro On 25 May 2015 at 16:06, Jose Jaime Ariza > wrote: Hi all, Just as a reminder: we'll have this call next Wednesday (May 27th) at 10:00 CEST. BR. On 21/05/15 09:04, Bollano Gianmario wrote: > Hi all, > I've prepared a Doodle to select the preferred date for the Robotics-WireCloud Meeting. > The link is: > http://doodle.com/zutqbtisn5a2xqsu > > Best, > Gianmario > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza > Inviato: mercoled? 20 maggio 2015 18:07 > A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; aarranz at fi.upm.es; amagan at conwet.com; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; jsoriano at fi.upm.es > Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] LD and Wirecloud > > Hi all, > > We should appoint a call with Wirecloud in order to talk about the tasks of the Live Demo. Could it be next week? What do you (TI and Wirecloud) think about monday or wednesday 10:00? > > Thank you very much. > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware-robotics mailing list > Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics > > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. > > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. > > -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jjaime at ikergune.com Wed May 27 10:05:58 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 10:05:58 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: LD and Wirecloud References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C4A3B@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: Hi ?lvaro, I cannot fin your hangout user, could you send it? BR Pepe On 27/05/15 09:57, I?igo Gonzalez wrote: Hi, we are going to use hangouts. Regards, i?igo On 27/05/15 09:38, ?lvaro Arranz wrote: Hi, how are going to connect, using hangouts? Best regards, ?lvaro On 25 May 2015 at 16:06, Jose Jaime Ariza > wrote: Hi all, Just as a reminder: we'll have this call next Wednesday (May 27th) at 10:00 CEST. BR. On 21/05/15 09:04, Bollano Gianmario wrote: > Hi all, > I've prepared a Doodle to select the preferred date for the Robotics-WireCloud Meeting. > The link is: > http://doodle.com/zutqbtisn5a2xqsu > > Best, > Gianmario > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza > Inviato: mercoled? 20 maggio 2015 18:07 > A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; aarranz at fi.upm.es; amagan at conwet.com; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; jsoriano at fi.upm.es > Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] LD and Wirecloud > > Hi all, > > We should appoint a call with Wirecloud in order to talk about the tasks of the Live Demo. Could it be next week? What do you (TI and Wirecloud) think about monday or wednesday 10:00? > > Thank you very much. > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware-robotics mailing list > Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics > > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. > > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. > > -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From pierangelo.garino at telecomitalia.it Wed May 27 10:07:37 2015 From: pierangelo.garino at telecomitalia.it (Garino Pierangelo) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 08:07:37 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: LD and Wirecloud In-Reply-To: References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C4A3B@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: Hi Inigo, Can you send the invite to me? Thanks Pier Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: mercoled? 27 maggio 2015 09:58 A: ?lvaro Arranz; Jose Jaime Ariza Cc: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; jsoriano at fi.upm.es; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; amagan at conwet.com Oggetto: Re: [Fiware-robotics] R: LD and Wirecloud Hi, we are going to use hangouts. Regards, i?igo On 27/05/15 09:38, ?lvaro Arranz wrote: Hi, how are going to connect, using hangouts? Best regards, ?lvaro On 25 May 2015 at 16:06, Jose Jaime Ariza > wrote: Hi all, Just as a reminder: we'll have this call next Wednesday (May 27th) at 10:00 CEST. BR. On 21/05/15 09:04, Bollano Gianmario wrote: > Hi all, > I've prepared a Doodle to select the preferred date for the Robotics-WireCloud Meeting. > The link is: > http://doodle.com/zutqbtisn5a2xqsu > > Best, > Gianmario > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza > Inviato: mercoled? 20 maggio 2015 18:07 > A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; aarranz at fi.upm.es; amagan at conwet.com; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; jsoriano at fi.upm.es > Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] LD and Wirecloud > > Hi all, > > We should appoint a call with Wirecloud in order to talk about the tasks of the Live Demo. Could it be next week? What do you (TI and Wirecloud) think about monday or wednesday 10:00? > > Thank you very much. > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware-robotics mailing list > Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics > > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. > > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. > > -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it Wed May 27 10:08:57 2015 From: roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it (Antonini Roberto) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 08:08:57 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: R: LD and Wirecloud In-Reply-To: References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F62F4C4A3B@telmbb003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: <246C286B275B1B46A255552CD236DA8643D5596D@TELMBA001BA020.telecomitalia.local> ... and to me. Thanks, R Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Garino Pierangelo Inviato: mercoled? 27 maggio 2015 10:08 A: I?igo Gonzalez Cc: amagan at conwet.com; ?lvaro Arranz; fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; jsoriano at fi.upm.es; fdelavega at fi.upm.es Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] R: R: LD and Wirecloud Hi Inigo, Can you send the invite to me? Thanks Pier Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di I?igo Gonzalez Inviato: mercoled? 27 maggio 2015 09:58 A: ?lvaro Arranz; Jose Jaime Ariza Cc: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; jsoriano at fi.upm.es; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; amagan at conwet.com Oggetto: Re: [Fiware-robotics] R: LD and Wirecloud Hi, we are going to use hangouts. Regards, i?igo On 27/05/15 09:38, ?lvaro Arranz wrote: Hi, how are going to connect, using hangouts? Best regards, ?lvaro On 25 May 2015 at 16:06, Jose Jaime Ariza > wrote: Hi all, Just as a reminder: we'll have this call next Wednesday (May 27th) at 10:00 CEST. BR. On 21/05/15 09:04, Bollano Gianmario wrote: > Hi all, > I've prepared a Doodle to select the preferred date for the Robotics-WireCloud Meeting. > The link is: > http://doodle.com/zutqbtisn5a2xqsu > > Best, > Gianmario > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza > Inviato: mercoled? 20 maggio 2015 18:07 > A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org; aarranz at fi.upm.es; amagan at conwet.com; fdelavega at fi.upm.es; jsoriano at fi.upm.es > Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] LD and Wirecloud > > Hi all, > > We should appoint a call with Wirecloud in order to talk about the tasks of the Live Demo. Could it be next week? What do you (TI and Wirecloud) think about monday or wednesday 10:00? > > Thank you very much. > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware-robotics mailing list > Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics > > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. > > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. > > -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From igonzalez at ikergune.com Wed May 27 10:26:30 2015 From: igonzalez at ikergune.com (=?iso-8859-1?Q?I=F1igo_Gonzalez?=) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 10:26:30 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] Fwd: Call on Robots demo References: Message-ID: Hi, here you have the mail I sent on 04/03/15 Regards, I?igo -------- Forwarded Message -------- Subject: Call on Robots demo Date: 04/03/15 10:31 From: I?igo Gonzalez To: jsoriano at fi.upm.es , Angel Hernandez , pierangelo.garino at telecomitalia.it , Jose Jaime Ariza , fdelavega at fi.upm.es , amagan at conwet.com , aarranz at fi.upm.es , roberto1.antonini at telecomitalia.it , gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it >> Bollano Gianmario , davide.colombatto at telecomitalia.it >> Colombatto Davide Hi, as we said yesterday here you have our control panel's screenshots. Here I explain each module: Firos.png: 1. The left aside, it contains the robots and theirs actions. Each robot is an accordion that contains this modules. 2. The map view. It shows where the robot is and a user can click on it to send the robot to a position. 3. The joystick view. This element is to teleoperate the robot as it is done with radio-control cars 4. Data view. This view shows in text boxes the value of the robot attribute Firos2.png: 1. Generic sender. It contenins some text inputs and when clicking on send button it generates the message following the structure and sends it 2. The configuration panel. Eah view has the close button and the configure button. When clicking on configure this panel will be configurated with the view's parameters and will be shown. This is mostly our control panel. Regards, i?igo -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Firos.png Type: image/png Size: 153726 bytes Desc: Firos.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Firos2.png Type: image/png Size: 111658 bytes Desc: Firos2.png URL: From gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it Wed May 27 11:34:19 2015 From: gianmario.bollano at telecomitalia.it (Bollano Gianmario) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 09:34:19 +0000 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: Port issue summary In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F63BFDC83C@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Hi Pepe, what's the difference between proposal 2 and proposal 3 in the document? -----Messaggio originale----- Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza Inviato: marted? 26 maggio 2015 17:22 A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Port issue summary Hi, I've summarized the port issue and the three proposed solutions in this document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ReZKrIxWN5gQLMPsUbmYMqvWiptuAj0AxGr138SAkzU/edit?usp=sharing Please, have a look and change any thing you think necessary. BR. -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group _______________________________________________ Fiware-robotics mailing list Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. From jjaime at ikergune.com Wed May 27 11:46:47 2015 From: jjaime at ikergune.com (Jose Jaime Ariza) Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 11:46:47 +0200 Subject: [Fiware-robotics] R: Port issue summary References: <7E649CBD84A947498203DAF8F098B1F63BFDC83C@telmba003ba020.telecomitalia.local> Message-ID: Hi, In proposal 2 RCM assures that the selected port is perfectly usable. In proposal 3 FIROS does some checking on the port proposed by RCM. I've discovered that the link to the port-discovery analysis was in the wrong proposal, I've just fixed it. BR Pepe On 27/05/15 11:34, Bollano Gianmario wrote: > Hi Pepe, > what's the difference between proposal 2 and proposal 3 in the document? > > > -----Messaggio originale----- > Da: fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org [mailto:fiware-robotics-bounces at lists.fi-ware.org] Per conto di Jose Jaime Ariza > Inviato: marted? 26 maggio 2015 17:22 > A: fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > Oggetto: [Fiware-robotics] Port issue summary > > Hi, > > I've summarized the port issue and the three proposed solutions in this > document: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ReZKrIxWN5gQLMPsUbmYMqvWiptuAj0AxGr138SAkzU/edit?usp=sharing > > Please, have a look and change any thing you think necessary. > > BR. > > -- > Jos? Jaime Ariza > R&D Engineer > +34 696604288 > Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware-robotics mailing list > Fiware-robotics at lists.fi-ware.org > https://lists.fi-ware.org/listinfo/fiware-robotics > > Questo messaggio e i suoi allegati sono indirizzati esclusivamente alle persone indicate. La diffusione, copia o qualsiasi altra azione derivante dalla conoscenza di queste informazioni sono rigorosamente vietate. Qualora abbiate ricevuto questo documento per errore siete cortesemente pregati di darne immediata comunicazione al mittente e di provvedere alla sua distruzione, Grazie. > > This e-mail and any attachments is confidential and may contain privileged information intended for the addressee(s) only. Dissemination, copying, printing or use by anybody else is unauthorised. If you are not the intended recipient, please delete this message and any attachments and advise the sender by return e-mail, Thanks. > > -- Jos? Jaime Ariza R&D Engineer +34 696604288 Ikergune, Etxe-Tar group