Re: [Iotsi] New IoT effort at

Eliot Lear <> Tue, 23 August 2016 10:52 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F67B12D933; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 03:52:49 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -15.07
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-15.07 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.548, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] 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 vNoioOoLzJLY; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 03:52:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 21CE312D0ED; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 03:52:46 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple;;; l=2605; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1471949567; x=1473159167; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=9ivJh1IB5wZK9XyQWmuBTMC8DX2TOPJohocxd6cJfTE=; b=fYTElg52btqH9KW91Xio6vjFsQibqdMEWWODX0Jzrlc4CsLCfvLlPJ/U UFpqwpV3c5oXw7eXUPhYrV3X4krDU+i/fhEdRirqqIVNFkhHkiwPQOx6i 9y4oZY7TWOhroLGgdya/jmf8fl2ipL935xXodZBPnrAEbmbcxVhqeh+LS Q=;
X-Files: signature.asc : 481
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0CxBACEKrxX/xbLJq1egykBAQEBAXIqU?= =?us-ascii?q?rgGgX0chgECgiQSAgEBAQEBAQFeJ4RhAQUjVhALGCoCAlcGAQwIAQGILa5ekAM?= =?us-ascii?q?BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQERDoglCIJNh0GCWgEEiDGRF4M+gXNviQGCO4ceh?= =?us-ascii?q?XeQOSULJIN8OjSGEQEBAQ?=
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,565,1464652800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="645879272"
Received: from (HELO ([]) by with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 23 Aug 2016 10:52:45 +0000
Received: from [] ( []) by (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u7NAqiHW020540; Tue, 23 Aug 2016 10:52:44 GMT
To: Tim Coote <>, David Janes <>
References: <> <> <>
From: Eliot Lear <>
Message-ID: <>
Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 12:52:44 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="cHVTgheOD0Ts5eK4oJvRBKIIx4dRRX72u"
Archived-At: <>
Cc:, Ted Hardie <>, Internet Architecture Board <>
Subject: Re: [Iotsi] New IoT effort at
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Internet of Things Semantic Interoperability Workshop <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2016 10:52:49 -0000

Hi Tim,

On 8/23/16 10:58 AM, Tim Coote wrote:
> Hullo
> Based on practical experience, one of the biggest challenges is to
> have a view of the overall system state. This is partly covered in the
> concepts of interim (interstitial?) states in this paper, but bugs and
> potential bugs in composed components need to be accounted for (I
> think). This degree of uncertainty can be modelled, but probably not
> in the hardware scope of Things themselves as they tend to be
> under-powered.*
> However, there is a significant issue that the deployed Things do not
> necessarily tell (or know) the truth about what they are or their
> current state.

This is the exact use case we have focused on in our work.  The approach
we take to address that is MUD+802.1AR so that assertions are made by
the manufacturer of the Thing and not the Thing itself.  I'll have more
to say about the latter later.