Re: [m2m-iwg] AXEDA Comments on MQTT contribution to ECLIPSE PAHO & OASI

[Scott de Deugd <dedeugd@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Membership is required to participate directly
in the TC. I do believe that Individual and Individual/Associate membership
meets this.  

Laurent Liscia has been helpful with
membership question and  could confirm this, and their policy for
observers. Here is his contact info: https://www.oasis-open.org/people/staff/laurent-liscia

Here are the OASIS membership options.
 https://www.oasis-open.org/join/categories-dues


....................Scott



From:      
 Rick Bullotta <rick.bullotta@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:      
 m2m Industry Working
Group <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:      
 01/28/2013 11:02 AM
Subject:    
   Re: [m2m-iwg]
AXEDA Comments on MQTT contribution to        ECLIPSE
       PAHO        &
       OASIS
Sent by:    
   m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Hi, Scott.
 
Makes total sense, and there
may be perfectly good reasons to break the two initiatives into separate
activities.  Regarding OASIS, it is a bit unclear as to whether or
not paid membership is required to participate/vote.  I do know that
OASIS has very open intellectual property rights policies and participation
options for observers though.
 
Rick
 
From: m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Scott de Deugd
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2013 10:52 AM
To: m2m Industry Working Group
Subject: Re: [m2m-iwg] AXEDA Comments on MQTT contribution to ECLIPSE
PAHO & OASIS
 
Rick, it is important to understand and define
a level of backward compatibility for formal standardization of the MQTT
specification to avoid market disruption, while at the same time being
able to get work going on interoperability and integration topics like
those you have listed. 

I have proposed that Eclipse join the MQTT standardization TC at OASIS,
not only to include input from the open development community but also
to see if we can find ways to collaborate across the open standard and
the open source communities. For example as the TC documents requirements
and recommends enhancements, (even those that  might break backward
compatibility or are out of scope for a V1 standard), a collaboration with
the Paho project could be working on implementations in anticipation of
a vNext version of the  spec. 

Design and implementations of discovery, topic mapping,  and  REST
API are examples of contributions that could get started immediately in
Eclipse  and sync'ed with the OASIS work.

.....Scott 





From:        Rick
Bullotta <rick.bullotta@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:        m2m Industry
Working Group <m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:        01/26/2013
03:49 PM 
Subject:        Re:
[m2m-iwg] AXEDA Comments on MQTT contribution to ECLIPSE PAHO    
   &        OASIS
Sent by:        m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

---

Well, someone at OASIS is trying to bring MQTT under their auspices, as
I’ve received specific solicitations to that effect asking if we wanted
to participate… 
  
Also, I think a LOT more focus needs to be placed on some of the significant
functional gaps in the current MQTT protocol, and on capabilities that
would greatly improve interoperability and integration.
  
Notably, these include: 
  
-          Discovery capabilities
-          Stronger typing and metadata for payloads
-          Semantics for data, events, services,
blob/file and stream content (all essential for a modern M2M platform)
-          Standardizing a REST API model
-          Store-and-forward best practices/reference
implementations for occasionally connected devices
-          …and so on…
  
Those items would go a long way towards helping MQTT achieve its full potential
as a general purpose M2M protocol, API, and standard.
  
Rick Bullotta 
ThingWorx 
  
  
From: m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of UOMo
Sent: Saturday, January 26, 2013 2:40 PM
To: m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [m2m-iwg] AXEDA Comments on MQTT contribution to ECLIPSE
PAHO & OASIS 
  
All, 
  
Thanks a lot for the update. I was about to ask about Paho as opposed to
the Lua tools earlier, but had to re-subscribe due to that strange GMX
mail bug with Eclipse.org. 
At the moment, it doesn't look like there's a Paho or Java/C related M2M
package under the Kepler release train, or did I miss something? 
  
Should it still be part of those trains, how about Eclipse for Mobile Developers:
http://www.eclipse.org/downloads/packages/eclipse-mobile-developers/junosr1
  
It contains both C and Java support, so it might be a good foundation for
Paho. 
  
Not sure, what's it with OASIS? It is mentioned a few time, but the message
does not refer directly to anything by OASIS. 
  
There is of course an OASIS standard, UnitsML often used as transfer format
to the UCUM standard and codes: https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=unitsml
  
Interesting, so while MQTT isn't an OASIS standard, it looks like AMQP
is about to become one?;-) 
Those of you dealing with OASIS might have seen this comparison then: https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/amqp/201202/msg00086/StormMQ_WhitePaper_-_A_Comparison_of_AMQP_and_MQTT.pdf
  
Werner_______________________________________________
m2m-iwg mailing list
m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2m-iwg_______________________________________________
m2m-iwg mailing list
m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2m-iwg