Re: What is Ant's Fit Protocol? Sun, 22 January 2017 22:01 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F69D1293D8 for <>; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:01:08 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Z875EHMLCPJP for <>; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:01:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74617128B37 for <>; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:01:06 -0800 (PST)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F166DC0026B0 for <>; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:01:05 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed;; h=message-id :from:to:in-reply-to:subject:date:content-type:mime-version; s=; bh=ZsSyKrEl+K7/4KatxQIM7mxKzbg=; b=u4DDBq8zo/tArvcns xw6oQclOfP9fVLlaeNUgMfwbF4lqm+C7mepody2cJrX/8OQO48fqGxf6fL1lU/Qw 1KsMS+jUxC56anzmHT1ywCtz59buxKdpMDBCjMILErang80/eHM7cGKpox3ALI+U 4Kr5cgnbcas6iZcHJ1Qo5UgiVc=
Received: from localhost ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 453B1C0026AC for <>; Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:01:05 -0800 (PST)
Message-Id: <>
To: "IETF Mailing List" <>
X-Mailer: Atmail 7.5.3
in-reply-to: <>
Subject: Re: What is Ant's Fit Protocol?
Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 17:01:05 -0500
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="=_7f8a091fa77f348d2c8a108ff5615c96"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 22 Jan 2017 22:01:08 -0000

Right, the website shows quite a few well-known companies using their
technology.  Possibly we have the timetable backwards.  Perhaps, "We
needed something better so we bought that company because we thought
it had a better solution."  That gives them a better solution and the
ability to push changes as needed to _keep_ it better in the future. 
The only downside is to users outside their company, who can't predict


----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren Kumari" <>
Cc:" Disgust" <>
Sent:Sun, 22 Jan 2017 14:21:07 -0500
Subject:Re: What is Ant's Fit Protocol?

 On Sun, Jan 22, 2017 at 12:27 PM, <> wrote:
 > The URL you provide says:
 > "ANT/ANT+ are managed by ANT Wireless, a division of Dynastream
 > Inc.......Dynastream was established in 1998 and became a wholly
 > subsidiary of Garmin Ltd. in December 2006. "
 > So, there is the most likely reason for using a new proprietary
 > They OWN the company. Clearly, the company's software is superior
to any
 > solution that was 'Not Invented Here'.

 Sorry, but no -- that is an entirely reasonable supposition for
 Garmin, but ANT/ANT+ is used by a significant number of other
 companies as well -- for example, I know them from Peloton exercise
 bikes, Samsung phones, etc.
 A quick glance at their "directory" shows what looks like a few
 hundred brands, and >600 products.

 From a *very* quick glance it seems that, for simple things, it is
 simpler to integrate than programming against bluetooth directly (e.g
 the Nordic RNF5283 is ~$2.00, and does BLE, ANT and NFC) -- there are
 a number of friendly looking libraries and demos for things like
 talking to bikes, etc. ANT *feels* like it provides a higher layer /
 abstraction to program against -- for example, this datasheet
 'tis been many years since I tried to integrate a bluetooth module
 into something, but when I did, there seemed to be so much rope that
 getting started was tricky...

 I suspect that the root answer to Alessandro question is a
 of 1: NIH, 2: because other devices I need to talk to already do
 and 3: better abstractions / nicely defined and documented stack.

 [ Note: This is just from a brief skim of their website - I may be
 completely wrong, BT / BLE may have progressed and libraries
 and better, clearer profiles created, etc... ]


 > -Sandy
 > ----- Original Message -----
 > From:
 > "Alessandro Vesely" <>
 > To:
 > <>
 > Cc:
 > Sent:
 > Sat, 21 Jan 2017 21:10:57 +0100
 > Subject:
 > What is Ant's Fit Protocol?
 > Hi,
 > I annoyingly see this stuff in some GPS devices. It seems to be a
 > proprietary
 > protocol for wireless communication, also used as a file format. It
 > resumed
 > here:
 > I'm wondering why companies use that protocol instead of an open
 > Is
 > it because there is no suitable open standard or just because they
hate open
 > standards?
 > I would try and dissuade open source packages, e.g. gpsbabel, to
try to
 > support
 > it, since that protocol seems to be going to change unpredictably
and hence
 > their software will never work. Opinions?
 > TIA for any reply
 > Ale

 I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad
 idea in the first place.
 This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later
 regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair
 of pants.