Re: [WoT IG] F2F Agenda

Hi,

I'm Kensaku Komatsu working at NTT communications.

>        Service Discovery options:

*> *o   Proximity based with NFC, QR-codes, BLE, etc. Example: Google
Physical Web <http://google.github.io/physical-web/>

> o   Local network, based on UPnP, mDNS etc

> o   Local and remote based on service registrations

Appending to above topic proposed by Claes, I'd like to discuss about
what framework should be considered to discover and control devices
in homenetwork etc. (As I requested to Dave before)

As you know that for several years, there were lots of discussion
about device discovery issues
such as SSDP, mDNS. But using those existing protocols within web
architecture seems difficult
for several reasons (mostly, privacy issues).

More over, current network devices such as DLNA are based on local web
server model, but
currently webappsec wg is now having a discussion to prohibit
accessing such a local web server
from browser. It means, it becomes hard to orchestrate existing
network devices from browser.

So, I think for moving forward to Web of Things movement and realize
innovative device orchestration
services within web architecture, adequate framework discussion for
discovering and controlling devices will be required.
( I guess WebRTC has a potential to address above issues )

Best,

--- Ken

2015-04-15 15:03 GMT+02:00 Nilsson, Claes1 <Claes1.Nilsson@sonymobile.com>:

> Hi,
>
>
>
> I miss the use case I sent by mail on March 26,
> https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wot-ig/2015Mar/0057.html, in
> the list of use case contributions.
>
>
>
> Regarding the “Web of Things Framework: deliverable draft Working Group
> Charter and IG Report” under “Proposed Task Forces” at the F2F meeting wiki
> I am considering the following:
>
>
>
>    - The classical web model is client-server (with public address). How
>    to support an architecture with “thing-to-thing”-communication?
>
> ·        Use of protocol converting hubs? For example, if a hub converts
> between HTTP/TLS to CoAP/DTLS then we don’t get true E2E security. Should
> we aim for an architecture with support for CoAP/DTLS in application
> servers?
>
> ·        Addressing: Role of IPv6? A goal is to use IP-addressing across
> different network types and give each device its own unique and global
> IPv6-address
>
> ·        URLs to WoT services on devices. DNS for WoT?
>
> ·        Leveraging the REST API approach for WoT services
>
> ·        Service Discovery options:
>
> o   Proximity based with NFC, QR-codes, BLE, etc. Example: Google
> Physical Web <http://google.github.io/physical-web/>
>
> o   Local network, based on UPnP, mDNS etc
>
> o   Local and remote based on service registrations
>
>
>
> For Security & Privacy I am considering:
>
>
>
> ·        Distributed access control, using e.g. OAuth.
>
>
>
>
>
> BR
>
>
>
>
>
> *Claes Nilsson*
>
> Master Engineer - Web Research
>
> Advanced Application Lab, Technology
>
>
>
> *Sony Mobile Communications*
>
> Tel: +46 70 55 66 878
>
> claes1.nilsson@sonymobile.com <Firstname.Lastname@sonymobile.com>
>
>
>
> sonymobile.com
>
>
>
> [image: Sony logotype_23px height_Email_144dpi]
>
>
>
> *From:* Heuer, Joerg [mailto:Joerg.Heuer@siemens.com
> <Joerg.Heuer@siemens.com>]
> *Sent:* den 14 april 2015 16:59
> *To:* Public Web of Things IG
> *Subject:* [WoT IG] F2F Agenda
>
>
>
>
>
> Hello all,
>
>
>
> Find below the current status of the WoT IG F2F planning based on your
> contributions. We would like to discuss this in the upcoming call.
>
>
>
> So please check
>
> -        that your contributions are reflected in the listed sessions
> appropriate
>
> -        update the titles of the contributions
>
> -        the agenda structure
>
> we need your feedback so we can update the agenda accordingly.
>
>
>
> Beyond that please provide your input to the organization of the upcoming
> IG work. Starting with the F2F we need to kick off discussion on the WoT
> landscape and framework.
>
>
>
> To organize the work we need to prepare for the F2F
>
> -        list of building blocks for the WoT framework (an initial list
> is given in the F2F wiki)
>
> -        discuss how can we appropriate compile and cluster those
> building blocks
>
> -        for which we start a task force to work on those building blocks
>
> -        how to contribute as a result also to the WoT landscape report
>
> Do you see further aspects to consider? What are your proposal to organize
> this?
>
>
>
> BR,
>
> Joerg
>
>
>
> Contributions to WoT IG F2F Sessions
>
> =============================
>
> -        Use Case contributions
>
> ·        Status of use case contributions
>
> ·        Oxford Flood Network project (Edoardo Pignotti <
> Edoardo.Pignotti@nominet.org.uk>)
>
> ·        Home automation (kajimoto.kazuo@jp.panasonic.com )
>
> ·        Y.2063 in ITU-T, WoT use cases (ETRI, 이원석 [wonsuk.lee@etri.re.kr],
> chan@w3.org)
>
> ·        [?IETF? (Romascanu, Dan (Dan) [dromasca@avaya.com])]
>
> ·        Use Case document structure
>
> -        Term Definitions
>
> ·        Initial definitions compiled so far
>
> -        Technical Landscape / WoT Framework
>
> ·        UC & WoT Architecture, Soumya Kanti Datta
>
> ·        wot.js demonstration, simple web of things architecure model,
> Jonathan Jeon
>
> ·        FP7 COMPOSE project activities; IoT platform glue.things -
> Node-RED as generic IoT orchestration and IoT app deployment tool (Robert
> Kleinfeld)
>
> ·        Web Thing data model (Dominique Guinard)
>
> -        Break Out Discussions
>
> -        Working mode, scope and structure of the WoT IG
>
>
>
>
>
> Schedule for WoT IG F2F
>
> ====================
>
>
>
> Tuesday
>
>
>
> 9:00-10:00 Intro / UC
>
> 10:00-10:30 Coffee Break
>
> 10:30-11:30 UC Session / Document
>
> 11:30-12:45 Lunch
>
> 12:45-13:45 Tech Landscape
>
> 13:45-14:00 Preparation break-outs 1
>
> 14:00-14:30 Coffee Break
>
> 14:30-16:00 Break-out session
>
> 16:00-16:30 Sync from break-out (plenary)
>
> 16:30-17:00 Coffee break
>
> 17:00-17:30 Wrap-up
>
>
>
>
>
> Wednesday
>
>
>
> 9:00-10:00 WoT IG working mode and organization (Summer F2F, Telco,
> GitHub, How to come from the framework to the TFs …)
>
> 10:00-11:00 Terms & Definition
>
> 11:00-11:30 Coffee Break
>
> 11:30-12:30 Discussion of Task Forces
>
> 12:30-13:45 Lunch
>
> 13:45-14:00 break-out reports & sync
>
> 14:00-15:30 break-out session 4
>
> 15:30-16:00 Coffee Break
>
> 16:00-16:30 reports from break-out (plenary)
>
> 16:30-17:30 Wrap-up
>
>
>
> Break Out Sessions
>
> ================
>
>
>
> Break Out sessions proposed so far:
>
> -        Definition session: 1. Towards a common definition of web of
> things (WoT), 2. How WoT is different from IoT
>
> -        Wearable devices and web of things
>
> -        Extensions of google physical web project for generic discovery
> of IoT devices
>
> -        A session about data models and design patterns for Web things
>
> -        Evolution from existing M2M to IoT/WoT (how, why, when?)
>
> -        WoT Framework / Taxonomy of Building Blocks
>
> -        solutions enabling web apps to interact with network devices
>
> -        WoT interaction with Social Networks Services / Social Media
>
>
>
> Use Case contributions
>
> ===================
>
> Volunteer                           Use Case Title
>                                UC Category
>
> ———————————————————————————————————————————————————
>
> Dave                     Smart control of washing machine          smart
> home / home automation / deferred operation
>
> Joerg                    EV
> Charging                                                      smart cities
> / smart grid / advanced distribution / devices adapt supply
>
> Robert Kleinfeld  Universal discovery and control of smart home
> devices          smart home / home automation / discovery / interactions
>
> Edoardo Pignotti The Oxford Flood Network                 smart cities/
> other utilities/ Monitoring water levels for flood warnings
>
> Souleiman Hasan & Edward Curry     Home Water Awareness and Conservation
>   smart home / home automation / water usage
>
> Takuki Kamiya     Home Automation
>
>
>
> Kazuo Kajimoto   Home Automation
>
>
>
> Satoru Takagi  usecase named pervasive browsers
>
>
>
>
>
>
>