OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

obix message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [obix] RE: Issues in Scope Creep


I agree on the comment of Craig that oBIX can be deployed on rather constrained devices. The resource demand mainly depends on the encoding and message exchange protocol in use and also the number of implemented oBIX services.

This is also the intention behind the new protocol bindings and encodings to make oBIX useable on constrained embedded devices. For example we are successfullly using oBIX with CoAP and XML or EXI on a 6LoWPAN temperature sensor based on the Zolertia Z1 platform (http://zolertia.com/sites/default/files/Zolertia-Z1-Brochure.pdf) which uses a TI MSP430 with 16 Mhz and 8KB RAM.

Since the device is only offering a few data points it is no problem. Maybe we should have in the conformance section something like profiles, like a "oBIX Light Profile for embedded devices" where a conformant server has to provide less services or specific lightweight bindings and encodings.

I think the problem here is to communicate such show cases and to do the appropriate marketing. Maybe once the new bindings and encodings are out we can provide information on the website that illustrates the different use case scenarios.


Am 03.06.2013 17:01, schrieb Gemmill, Craig:

If the perception is that oBIX 1.1 requires large processors and memory, then we need to (a) confirm that is not the case, then (b) decide how to evangelize that to the market.  It could just be that is the propaganda being put out by the people who stand to gain by users choosing a different approach than oBIX.  It could be that because the main implementation of oBIX is Niagara AX, which typically runs on fairly beefy hardware, people assume that is the only way oBIX can be done.  But we’ve done an implementation that runs in around 100KB, which uses oBIX (binary encoding) for reading and writing values.  It’s a limited form of oBIX, but certainly disproves the notion that oBIX 1.1 requires a larger machine.





From: obix@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:obix@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Considine, Toby
Sent: Monday, June 03, 2013 9:35 AM
To: obix@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [obix] Issues in Scope Creep


Some feedback from the HayStack conference was that being compliant with oBIX 1.1 was going to require large processors and memory. Without descending into whether that is or is not true, and without pondering what these thoughts not raised in comments are based on, It is a real perception.


I am personally frustrated with oBIX, always have been, because it does not support tome of the queries similar to those I posited in my last  post. On the other hand, we need to make it clearly unambiguous that a simple service exposing a handful of oBIX points can be compliant on the smallest system.




"When one door closes, another opens; but we often look so long and so regretfully upon the closed door that we do not see the one which has opened for us."

-- Alexander Graham Bell

Toby Considine


Editor, OASIS EMIX, Energy Interoperation
Campus Services Information Technology
University of North Carolina
Chapel Hill, NC


Email: Toby.Considine@ unc.edu
Phone: (919)962-9073



Dipl.-Ing. Markus Jung
Research Assistant
Tel. +43 1 58801-18322
Fax +43 1 58801-18391
Institute of Computer Aided Automation
Treitlstr. 1-3/4. Stock/E183-1
Vienna University of Technology

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]