Re: [apps-discuss] Device Classification

Bob Wyman <> Fri, 28 October 2011 18:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 382FD21F86A4 for <>; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:58:46 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.976
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.976 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0EDdznNr-CAX for <>; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 358DE21F861E for <>; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:58:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by qyk34 with SMTP id 34so2335250qyk.10 for <>; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=GgkrW66BsH6N8YmjfDKt8sS15834tLbhhp02cu+Pp84=; b=JdHvtTqd23+ZsU0UV4UG+RcC3WCbLwi2fBeq+RVj57zR7/TRlmZyDZLtdsn5tzY2Se E47MY5R0mkVoWHT1glpnFeo8IO3fWhKd39Djgg/QFfzSnh7DTZYWrMlr3snfYjkNHvj2 +uTwcwBJjqC6w4yuG2ao5azUO259BK80ZmZW4=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by with SMTP id f4mr1042442qcl.148.1319828324474; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 28 Oct 2011 11:58:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 14:58:44 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: gd2PE9zSxg18RmUDez9-4LunJ1M
Message-ID: <>
From: Bob Wyman <>
To: Bruce Nordman <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00163646d92c71df1a04b0607a70"
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Device Classification
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2011 18:58:46 -0000

Consider using a mechanism like that defined for .well-known/host-meta URLs
as defined in
Assuming that each device had a tiny http server embedded in it, then I
could query a device like so:

GET /.well-known/host-meta HTTP/1.1

And, I would get back a response containing something like the following,
which would include a classification value as well as links to just about
any other URLs that might be interesting.

  <?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
  <XRD xmlns=''>
    <Property type=''>ip-router</Property>

    <Property type=''>IPR 2000</Property>

<Link rel='administrator'
href='' /> <Link rel='energy-consumption' href='' />

    <Link rel='manufacturer-site'
     href='' />


The nice thing about an approach such as that described above is that it is
easily extensible to cover whatever needs might appear in the future. it
would also be compatible with many of the systems that other folk are
building, such as
that deal with discovering information about people, accounts, etc.

bob wyman

On Fri, Oct 28, 2011 at 2:16 PM, Bruce Nordman <> wrote:

> Greetings all--
>   I am new to the apps area, with my involvement in IETF to date
> focused on energy management.
>   I recently posted:
> the goal of which is to define a very basic enumeration for
> classifying IP devices for generic purposes.  In my case, it is
> for a system that vacuums up energy data for all devices in a
> building to have a basic sense of what type of device it is
> (e.g. router, computer, printer, refrigerator, ...).
> I do believe that many applications would also find this useful,
> particularly as physical-world objects seek to understand what
> other devices are in their vicinity, whether or not they want to
> directly interact with them.
>   I am not seeking to do anything more complex than the above.
> This is not intended to replace detailed classification and characteristics
> schemes that exist or will be developed for narrow sets of devices -- this
> is only for the case of covering all devices and includes no
> characteristics.
>   I would welcome collaborators on this.
>   Thanks,
> --Bruce
> --
> *Bruce Nordman*
> Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory
> 510-486-7089
> m: 510-501-7943
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list