Presentation delivered during the Internet of Things World, Santa Clara pre-event workshop by Christian Legare - IPSO Alliance Chairman, Chief of Software Engineering, Micrium (Part of Silicon Labs) Internet Protocol for Smart Objects (IPSO) is an alliance that, among other things, defines a data model to represent sensor values and attributes. OMA uses IPSO Smart Objects v1.0 as its resource model to expose sensor information to a remote LwM2M Server. From the speaker from IPSO Alliance, you will learn: ● What is an IPSO Smart Object data model ● What do these Objects and Resources look like ● How to create and register your own resources ● What is next for IPSO Alliance

1. IPSO Alliance
Enabling IoT Devices’ Hardware and Software Interoperability

2. What is the IPSO
Alliance?
The IPSO Alliance is a global forum comprising a diverse
international membership focused on enabling IoT devices
to communicate, understand and trust each other with
global interoperability based on open standards.
IPSO Alliance membership is open to all organizations
supporting an IP-based approach to connecting smart
objects and interested in defining the future of the Internet
of Things.
25/18/2017
IPSO Alliance 2015 – All rights
reserved

3. IPSO Technical Advisory Board and Working Group Efforts
3
Resource
Model
Protocol
Model
Identity
Model
Physical
Model
Services
Model
Semantic
Model
Autonomous
Model
Technical
Advisory
Board
ROLE
• Define Guiding Principles
• Architecture Correctness
• Act on the Board Behalf
• Advise the Working Committees
• Ensure Consistency
Working
Groups
ACTIVE TO BE CHARTERED

4. The Importance of Interoperability
4
IoT Systems: heterogeneous, large-scale, distributed systems with multi-
vendor building-blocks
We need Interoperability to build systems, create systems of
systems, to keep cost low, to reduce risk, to spur innovation,…
IoT
The challenge
• An aircraft jet engine is built with
25,000 parts
• A passenger car has 30,000
• A wind turbine has 8,000
• There are >10,000 types of medical
devices
…all of which are from hundreds of
manufacturers

5. • Why Semantics?
• The 2015 McKinsey report that said 40% of the additional
value to IoT is interoperability
• Interoperability starts with the data
• The value add exists when data coming from any origin can
be shared and used by everybody
• The IPSO smart object definition is gaining traction:
•OMA
•Bluetooth (BIPSO)
•STMicroelectronics
•IoTerop (and its smart city initiatives)
•… and more
Semantic Working Group Charter
5

6. • Why Protocol?
• There are too many IP standards to choose from currently
• There is a need to evaluate performance; some perform
better in certain markets and others better elsewhere
• The Protocol Working Group is tasked with answering how
to use Internet Protocol(s)
Protocol Working Group Charter
6

7. • With the success of IPSO Smart Object v1, IPSO is now working on
Smart Object v2 which is specifically addressing the issues with:
• Stringent Object/Resource ID standardization processes and activities which are
becoming a barrier in describing “things” dynamically
• Compile / development time binding of Objects/Resources into code which
makes the adoption and continuous improvements to “things” rather difficult
• Interoperability can only be achieved by the SDOs interoperability
• OMA is a very important IPSO partner
Reasons for this presentation

8. IPSO Smart Object
Model V1.0

9. • IPSO Data Model V1.0
• Our surroundings can be expressed as a model of Objects & Resources
• Break large components into atomic components, e.g. relays, temperature sensors,
digital input / output, etc.
• Objects and Resources are standardized one by one, and registered with OMNA
LwM2M Registry
IPSO V1.0 Model
RelayTemperature Sensor
3303
5700 5601 5605…Sensor
Value
Min
Measured
Value
Reset (E)
Min/Max
Measure
Values
10245
5500 5501 5854…Digital Input
State
Digital Input
Counter
Off Time

10. • https://ipso-alliance.github.io/pub/
Object Validation
• Anybody can use composition to create new Objects from the existing
ones. You need to validate them before submitting new ones. You can use
'xmllint' to validate against the LWM2M Schema.
Welcome to the public IPSO Repository
10
# Run xmllint against one or multiple Objects
$ xmllint --noout --schema LWM2M.xsd example.xml
# The output should be:
$ example.xml validates

11. • http://www.openmobilealliance.org/wp/OMNA/LwM2M/LwM2MRegistry.html
OMNA can provide you with an unique Object or/and Resource Identifier:
(Object ID) or (ResourceID).
To register a new (Ojbect ID) or (Resource ID).
OMA has developed an editor for creating LwM2M Objects & Resources.
•The LwM2M Editor can be accessed here: Editor.
•The XML schema used by the LwM2M Editor can be found here: Schema.
OMA LightweightM2M (LwM2M) Object and Resource Registry
11

12. • http://devtoolkit.openmobilealliance.org/OEditor/default.aspx
This is a tool for creating, editing and viewing OMA LWM2M objects
OMA LWM2M Management Object Editor
12

13. IPSO v1.0
Requires to define the
sensors to “atomic” level
Data Model Escalation
x
y z o
TransportConnected Car
Smart Cities Industry
IPSO V1.0
Data Model

14. Challenges

15. • The definition and registration process of objects and resources doesn’t
escalate very well:
• All Objects / Resources and any permutations and variations thereof must be predefined á
priori
• Huge standardization effort is required to define Objects/Resources for components in
each vertical sector: industrial, smart cities, transport, etc
• It requires companies from different sectors to agree what and how to standardize sensor
properties.
• Registration, validation and verification effort cannot be underestimated if the aim is to reach out to
billion of devices.
Challenges of this Data Model
Logistic and Operational Challenge

16. • Since all the bindings are done at development/compile time, any new
“thing”, changes to an existing “thing”, or any new variations thereof
require redevelopment of drivers, testing, and firmware update
• There’s absolutely no way for a new “thing” to automatically work without
any changes to the client framework
Technical Challenge
Switch
Drvr
Temp
Drvr
Sensor drivers manually configured for each sensor & Client hardware
H/W
Sensors
Driver
Sensors
Client
Platform

17. • Reusable Object IDs and Resource IDs.
• Transport protocol and encoding data format independent.
• Easy to build your own Objects and add to repo.
• Easy to get feedback.
• Sufficient for current use cases.
• Trivial to integrate with LWM2M.
• Tested.
IPSO Smart Objects
17

18. These are examples of groups/companies/orgs that use IPSO objects...
• http://ipso-alliance.github.io/pub/
• http://www.eclipse.org/leshan/
• http://bluetoother.github.io/bipso/#/
• http://www.yanzinetworks.com/index.jsp
• http://www.eistec.se
• http://lwmqn.github.io
• http://www.versasense.com
• http://coap.technology/impls.html
• https://github.com/PeterEB/coap-shepherd
• https://github.com/contiki-os/contiki/tree/master/apps/ipso-objects
Interoperability
Any actual example system/implementation to demonstrate how IPSO plays so well for interoperability?
18

19. • The current paradigm doesn’t scale well in a market of billion of “things” –
including virtual - and millions of variations to the same “things”:
• Standardization & registration effort is a daunting task
• Development/Compile time integration is an impediment to interoperability
Limitations of the IPSO Smart Object model V1.0

20. Next Steps

21. • IPSO is working on a Node Meta Model
• A Model that defines how things should be defined
• “Things” do not need to be defined a priori and promotes runtime binding
• Proof of Concept is already completed and working in the real world
• Proof of Concept for integration with LWM2M already completed (ST
Micro)
• Synergy with IPSO
• IPSO deals only with the model
• The model is protocol, security, bootstrap, and commissioning agnostic –
a major synergy with OMA and LWM2M
• No framework available – Should we work with the Eclipse Foundation?
• Possible impact in the evolution of LwM2M
• This is for OMA to assess based on the information of the new model.
Next Steps

22. • No Web Linking! (but easy to add)
• LWM2M Object Versioning.
• Not suited for complex hypermedia interactions.
• Could have a richer language to represent IPSO Objects instead
of XML.
• Missing a lot of IETF CoRE-Link concepts: recource type "rt",
"cf", etc.
• Also URI 3303/0/5700 (no decoupling)
IPSO Smart Objects
22

23. IPSO Alliance
Membership
www.ipso-alliance.org
5/18/2017
IPSO Alliance 2015 – All rights
reserved
23

24. • Participate in Working Groups to help create and influence the use cases,
technical guidelines, marketing materials, lobbying efforts, and all other Alliance
work products
• Access pre-publication drafts of the design guidelines and internal documents
through the Working Groups; review and comment on new guidelines prior to
adoption
• Attend and participate in Alliance member-only meetings
• Leverage the IPSO brand and its alliances, present at IPSO-sponsored key
industry events, participate in interoperability test events
Additionally, promoter-level members may:
• Serve on the Board of Directors
• Hold leadership positions within IPSO committees
• Vote on all IPSO business
Why Join the IPSO Alliance?
24

25. Membership Levels
• Promoter: $5,000 per year
• Contributor: $2,500 per year
• Innovator: $1,000 per year [<10 employees and annual
revenues of $2.5M or less]
How to Join
25

26. THANK YOU!
www.ipso-alliance.org
5/18/2017
IPSO Alliance 2015 – All rights
reserved
26