Hello Tarek, Sorry if this was somewhat confusing and unclear. By northbound gw I mean the interface between the gateway and the backend. I also mistakenly wrote IRTF, it should be IETF (IRTF is not doing any similar work). This interface is based on CoRE, so yes, it relates to CoAP. But in CoRE there is also work on CoAP-HTTP proxying. What is more important in this context, I would say, is the web resource model proposed in CoRE. That is sort of independent on if you run it over CoAP or HTTP. This is what we are proposing. And just to be clear, it is perfectly possible to terminate CoAP in the backend as well, both via a gateway (then in one instance acting more as an IP gateway), or directly from an IoT device. I hope this helps. Best regards, Jan On 26042012 5:47 PM, "T.Elsaleh at surrey.ac.uk" <T.Elsaleh at surrey.ac.uk> wrote: >Hello Jan, > >Just to clarify, when you say gw northbound, do you mean >"resource-to-gateway" or "gateway-to-backend"? > >Could you tell me what interface type you are using? Is it CoAP-related? >Because from what I understand of CoAP is that it works between the >gateway and the resource (e.g. sensor). So what do you expect to use >between gateway and backend? > >Please correct me if I am mistaken. > >Best regards, >Tarek > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jan Höller [mailto:jan.holler at ericsson.com] >> Sent: 26 April 2012 07:37 >> To: Farkas, Lorant (NSN - HU/Budapest) >> Cc: Elsaleh T Mr (Electronic Eng); Jakob Saros; fiware-iot at lists.fi- >> ware.eu >> Subject: Re: [Fiware-iot] High-level description of Ericsson Gateway >> >> Hello, >> >> Just one minor clarification. The gw northbound interface isn't >> entirely proprietary. It is based on IRTF CoRE work and there are hence >> openly available specifications that define the interface in smaller or >> larger parts. There is one remaining component though that remains to >> be sorted out, and that is an appropriate profile for IoT resources. >> This is something being worked at, but it is for the time being >> entirely proprietary. >> >> Jan >> >> 26 apr 2012 kl. 08:22 skrev "Farkas, Lorant (NSN - HU/Budapest)" >> <lorant.farkas at nsn.com<mailto:lorant.farkas at nsn.com>>: >> >> Hello Tarek, >> >> The action item is a bit outdated, device handler as GE will not exist >> under this name any more (pending on approval, of course). >> Last week we were discussing the issue that there is no owner for the >> device handler GE and device frontend GE. Payam volunteered to take a >> look at one of these GE. >> The additional issue with the device frontend is that the Ericsson >> asset (gateway asset) speaks a proprietary REST interface on the >> northbound, implemented by their http server and http-coap proxy, >> whereas on the backend there is noone to implement the component >> (earlier this was called device frontend) that discusses with the >> gateway over this interface. >> >> I think it was wrongly captured in the minutes that Payam volunteered >> to take a look at the device handler, I think he was meaning device >> frontend. >> >> In the new architecture both device frontend and device handler >> functionalitites should become part of the backend core functionalities >> GE, I think. >> >> The biggest question now is who will implement/specify backend core >> functionalities GE and your contribution would be welcome here from the >> frontend perspective because Telefonica will likely not have an >> interface that discusses with the Ericsson gateway. >> FYI we were announced yesterday that there is one person from >> Telefonica dedicated to IoT and also a team will be set up on their >> side. We will discuss with them next week Thursday or Friday and it >> would be good if you Tarek could also participate in this call, if you >> are interested in/can contribute to this GE. >> >> Including the alternative gateway middleware solution from your side >> requires further discussions, but the first step would be for you to >> share document describing the features and its availability as an >> asset. >> >> Thanks & Br, >> >> Lorant >> >> >> >> From: ext T.Elsaleh at surrey.ac.uk<mailto:T.Elsaleh at surrey.ac.uk> >> [mailto:T.Elsaleh at surrey.ac.uk] >> Sent: Wednesday, April 25, 2012 7:18 PM >> To: Farkas, Lorant (NSN - HU/Budapest); >> jakob.saros at ericsson.com<mailto:jakob.saros at ericsson.com> >> Cc: fiware-iot at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-iot at lists.fi-ware.eu> >> Subject: RE: High-level description of Ericsson Gateway >> >> Hello Lorant, Jakob, >> >> I would like to follow up on the action point regarding: >> >> IoT04_18042012: ³AP Payam to look at the GW description and check if >> USurrey could contribute to the Device Handler in the backend (open >> specs, implementation).² >> >> As I have been away last week, I would like to clarify what exactly is >> required here. UoS does have an alternative gateway middleware >> solution, but what is required exactly from us in order to contribute >> to the ³Device Handler²? is it wrt ³gateway-to-backend² (northbound) or >> ³gateway-to-device² (southbound)? >> >> By the way, isn¹t the Device Handler GE in the Gateway? >> >> In terms of compatibility, is this with respect to CoAP, OSGi, or both? >> In either case, we currently don¹t support either of them, but can be >> considered for near future, as we are interested in using CoAP. >> >> >> Best regards, >> Tarek >> >> Tarek Elsaleh >> Research Assistant >> Centre for Commuication Systems Research (CCSR) Department of >> Electronic Engineering University of Surrey Guildford, GU2 7XH >> Tel: 01483 689485 >> >> >> >> From: fiware-iot-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-iot- >> bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu> [mailto:fiware-iot-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] >> On Behalf Of Farkas, Lorant (NSN - HU/Budapest) >> Sent: 18 April 2012 13:06 >> To: fiware-iot at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:fiware-iot at lists.fi-ware.eu> >> Subject: [Fiware-iot] FW: High-level description of Ericsson Gateway >> >> Dear All, >> >> FYI (especially Payam/Tarek). >> >> Thanks & Br, >> >> Lorant >> >> >> From: ext Jakob Saros [mailto:jakob.saros at ericsson.com] >> Sent: Friday, April 13, 2012 6:15 PM >> To: Fici Gian Piero; Guerra Sabrina; >> thierry.nagellen at orange.com<mailto:thierry.nagellen at orange.com>; >> Farkas, Lorant (NSN - HU/Budapest); Bisztray, Denes (NSN - HU/Budapest) >> Cc: Jan Höller >> Subject: High-level description of Ericsson Gateway >> >> Hi, >> >> Attached is a description of the Ericsson Gateway for further >> discussions. Please note that this is a DRAFT! The document includes >> information of gateway components, i.e. OSGi bundles, and interfaces >> northbound/southbound. I look forward to hearing your comments. >> >> BR/Jakob >> >> >> ________________________________ >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com<http://www.avg.com> >> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4948 - Release Date: >> 04/20/12 _______________________________________________ >> Fiware-iot mailing list >> Fiware-iot at lists.fi-ware.eu<mailto:Fiware-iot at lists.fi-ware.eu> >> http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-iot >> >> ----- >> No virus found in this message. >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com >> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4958 - Release Date: >> 04/25/12
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy