[6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart devices?

"Adriano Pezzuto (apezzuto)" <apezzuto@cisco.com> Fri, 30 October 2009 12:02 UTC

Return-Path: <apezzuto@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: 6lowapp@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: 6lowapp@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71E253A68A4 for <6lowapp@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:02:28 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -9.932
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.932 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.667, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 7eQp9518SCuo for <6lowapp@core3.amsl.com>; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-1.cisco.com (ams-iport-1.cisco.com [144.254.224.140]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 366A63A6814 for <6lowapp@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:02:27 -0700 (PDT)
Authentication-Results: ams-iport-1.cisco.com; dkim=neutral (message not signed) header.i=none
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ai4AAJZy6kqQ/uCWe2dsb2JhbACbUAEBFiQGrU+YIYQ9BA
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.44,653,1249257600"; d="scan'208";a="53198757"
Received: from ams-core-1.cisco.com ([144.254.224.150]) by ams-iport-1.cisco.com with ESMTP; 30 Oct 2009 12:02:43 +0000
Received: from xbh-ams-101.cisco.com (xbh-ams-101.cisco.com [144.254.74.71]) by ams-core-1.cisco.com (8.13.8/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n9UC2gEW025235 for <6lowapp@ietf.org>; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:02:42 GMT
Received: from xmb-ams-106.cisco.com ([144.254.74.81]) by xbh-ams-101.cisco.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:02:42 +0100
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
x-cr-puzzleid: {61CE3C3E-B617-4735-98AA-FC299E2C47D3}
x-cr-hashedpuzzle: An5u Ay5O B2Tt B4xM DP5Y DQiO DzWY EyBe EyW6 FrSf Ft5R F9lU GegY IvIR J6nB Kn8o; 1; NgBsAG8AdwBhAHAAcABAAGkAZQB0AGYALgBvAHIAZwA=; Sosha1_v1; 7; {61CE3C3E-B617-4735-98AA-FC299E2C47D3}; YQBwAGUAegB6AHUAdABvAEAAYwBpAHMAYwBvAC4AYwBvAG0A; Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:02:39 GMT; WwA2AGwAbwB3AGEAcABwAF0AIABSAGUAYQBsAGwAeQAgAHcAZQAgAG4AZQBlAGQAIABmAG8AcgAgAEgAVABUAFAAIABvAG4AIABzAG0AYQByAHQAIABkAGUAdgBpAGMAZQBzAD8A
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 13:02:39 +0100
Message-ID: <0D212BD466921646B58854FB79092CEC8E8644@XMB-AMS-106.cisco.com>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart devices?
Thread-Index: AcpZWODfOIlfPZ/8SOKnR5dwHmOf1w==
From: "Adriano Pezzuto (apezzuto)" <apezzuto@cisco.com>
To: <6lowapp@ietf.org>
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Oct 2009 12:02:42.0844 (UTC) FILETIME=[E2ACA5C0:01CA5958]
Subject: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart devices?
X-BeenThere: 6lowapp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Application protocols for constrained nodes and networks <6lowapp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowapp>, <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/6lowapp>
List-Post: <mailto:6lowapp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowapp>, <mailto:6lowapp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 12:02:28 -0000

Hello,
there is a lot effort to push HTTP and REST interfaces on smart objects
assuming that smart devices (sensor/actuators/readers) should act as Web
providers. On the other side, 6lowpan and other wireless sensor networks
are made by resource-constrained embedded devices so HTTP looks like too
resource expensive.

We are seeing a lot of proxying and gatewaying solutions to bring HTTP
and REST on the 6lowpan devices. But working with gateways and proxies
are always struggling especially at application level. My question here
is why we need to bring HTTP on smart objects?

Smart objects interact with the Internet as they like (and can) as
humans do. Humans type on a computer keyboard or play in front of the
iPhone camera while Things send sensing data or get commands to act on
the real world. Humans do not have an embedded HTTP server even if the
results of their actions (i.e. typing on a keyboard and playing in front
of a camera) are available as Web resources. In the same way, Things do
not need for an embedded HTTP server. Things interact with the Internet
using a lightweight protocol while the results of their interaction are
available on the Web as resources. It is a sort of "information shadow"
data that Things have on the Web. This data will be collected in a
suitable manner for the resource-constrained embedded devices and make
available as Web resource with HTTP and REST interfaces.

What do you think about it?

Regards,
Adriano