Open egekorkan opened 4 years ago
Cases where a protocol binding doesn't need to be able to map all WoT defined ops:
It is a tradeoff: unconditional interoperability vs. good vertical domain coverage. Unconditional interoperability is good within a given vertical domain; for that we have Zigbee. I see the mission of WoT as crossing the vertical domains and needing a lot of protocol options, including "natural" pub/sub.
There is also the web-device interaction pattern, with the following communication primitives:
I would like to be able to use WoT Thing Descriptions in this protocol environment, since the actions, events, and properties, all look the same to the end user apps and automations.
This maps naturally to Pub/Sub systems but requires a proxy at the application layer to cache data for program reads, etc.
Another use case for this interaction model is for (what I am calling) IoT-Fieldbus where we use IoT protocols and mechanisms to build agile and efficient systems for industrial controls.
I think 0MQ would also be very interesting; it is used in a lot of high-efficiency microservices, including Intel's Edge Insight platform. It supports both request/response and publish/subscribe patterns.
DDS would also be interesting... if we do it right, it might give us ROS2 as well.
OPC-UA, NETCONF and Modbus examples of node-wot will be used for the vocabulary and clearly indicate that they are prototypes. @relu91 for the Modbus and @lukesmolo for OPC-UA and Netconf
This is a placeholder for grouping previously (2 years ago) discussed protocols and similar mechanisms in the context of GitHub issues. I will close the following issues and group them here:
41
1
Following protocols were of interest in #1 and #41 and #42 :
Additionally, the following protocols were briefly discussed in the call of 31.01.2020: