You’re welcome Andy.
Regarding the CoAP protocol. I can’t see any IPR disclosure at the IETF for it right now.(1)
Regarding implementations, we are currently investigating this. For now we are considering two options: libcoap (2) which is licensed under GPLv2 or BSD and
Mathias Kovatsch’s implementations (3) also licensed under a BSD license.
(1)
https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/?option=document_search&document_search=draft-ietf-core-coap-13
(2)
http://libcoap.sourceforge.net/
(3)
http://people.inf.ethz.ch/mkovatsc/
Regards,
David Navarro
From: m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of andypiperuk@xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 6:40 PM
To: m2m Industry Working Group
Subject: Re: [m2m-iwg] COAP
David, thanks very much for your contribution, it's helpful to have someone "in the know"! Also useful to understand some of the differences here.
We discussed CoAP briefly on the Paho project call today. One of the questions that came up was around implementations and licensing (I think particularly in relation to involvement at OneM2M). Essentially we're currently not CoAP experts
but, should an implementation come to us and be donated to the project, we would be interested in looking at it. Are there any *EPL-compatible* CoAP implementations that it would make sense for us to consume? - assuming that the role of Paho is to be a home
of solid implementations of Open Standards messaging protocols for IoT/M2M.
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 5:28 PM, Navarro, David <david.navarro@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,
Please allow me to jump in. I’m working for Intel’s Opensource Technology Center and I participated
in the development of OMA’s LWM2M (which relies on CoAP as Julien said).
I don’t think CoAP and MQTT are designed to answer the same use cases. MQTT (as I understand it)
is all about publishing events with a subscribe mechanism. CoAP is designed to be a replacement of HTTP in constrained environments. So even if CoAP features an Observe mechanism to be notified of value changes, it is not its main purpose and in this, it will
be inferior to MQTT. And as an HTTP equivalent, CoAP makes no assumption on the system topology.
At the OMA, we choose to base LWM2M protocol on CoAP because it provides the core functionnalities
of HTTP (GET, PUT, POST, DELETE commands, TLS security) in a reduced footprint. The Observe mechanism is a nice-to-have feature but not essential in the LWM2M use-case.
Regards,
David Navarro
From:
m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:m2m-iwg-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Matteo Collina
Sent: Monday, April 15, 2013 6:19 PM
To: m2m Industry Working Group
Subject: Re: [m2m-iwg] COAP
The real difference between CoAP and MQTT is in how the notification of events works:
In practice, it is the "gateway" or end-user that start observing for changes on the sensor.
In MQTT, it is the other way around, it is the sensor that publishes stuff on a broker.
However CoAP allows some true P2P communication between devices, which is not possible in a central system like MQTT.
It has a real difference, and it may be the reason because it lacks adoption.
I think deploying a central client-server system is much easier.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Corporation SAS (French simplified joint stock company)
Registered headquarters: "Les Montalets"- 2, rue de Paris,
92196 Meudon Cedex, France
Registration Number: 302 456 199 R.C.S. NANTERRE
Capital: 4,572,000 Euros
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
_______________________________________________
m2m-iwg mailing list
m2m-iwg@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/m2m-iwg
--
Andy Piper | Farnborough, Hampshire (UK)
blog: http://andypiper.co.uk | skype: andypiperuk
twitter: @andypiper | images:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/andypiper
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Corporation SAS (French simplified joint stock company)
Registered headquarters: "Les Montalets"- 2, rue de Paris,
92196 Meudon Cedex, France
Registration Number: 302 456 199 R.C.S. NANTERRE
Capital: 4,572,000 Euros
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for
the sole use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution
by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies.
|