[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
- [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart device… Adriano Pezzuto (apezzuto)
- Re: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart de… Vlad Trifa
- Re: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart de… Don Sturek
- Re: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart de… Adriano Pezzuto (apezzuto)
- Re: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart de… Adam Dunkels
- Re: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart de… Adriano Pezzuto (apezzuto)
- Re: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart de… Vlad Trifa
- Re: [6lowapp] Really we need for HTTP on smart de… Zach Shelby