Hello Johannes

Well, you could start by creating one interface for an XMPP Server and one 
interface for an XMPP client. That interface could have methods returning basic 
information, perhaps something similar to what is being published through other 
methods.

However, for automation purposes I believe we also need an interface returning 
supported features (discovery), and perhaps also interfaces for important XEPs. 
For IoT I was thinking of creating interfaces for the Concentrators XEP (0326), 
sensor data XEP (0323) control XEP (0325) in a first effort (also the soon to 
be proposed Interoperability XEP), since these are important for automation. 
The interoperability effort in itself would implicitly include a myriad of 
interfaces (or loose-coupled contracts) for use within IoT.

Are you interested in writing a proposal together for this purpose?

Sincerely,
Peter Waher


-----Original Message-----
From: Hund, Johannes [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: den 28 juni 2013 10:35
To: XMPP Standards
Subject: Re: [Standards] Using .well-known/ to supplement XEP-0156

Hello Peter,

after a brief research, I agree that UPNP might be an interesting option for 
XEP-0174 or peer-to-peer XMPP as well as XEP-0156.
Basically, a DCP for XMPP server and client would need to be specified, right?

As I understood it, maybe the informations provided by the TXT record in 
XEP-0174 would be a good starting point for the informations.
Control points could cover things like create user and connection.

UPNP seems more browsable and more versatile to me compared to mDNS and DNS-SD.

Best regards,
Johannes


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag 
von Peter Waher
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 23. Mai 2013 05:45
An: XMPP Standards
Betreff: Re: [Standards] Using .well-known/ to supplement XEP-0156

Hello Johannes.

The thought has crossed my mind. It has been nagging me as a good thing to do, 
but I haven't come to the point yet to try it out.

But, the reasons to use UPnP, instead of, or in parallel with DNS, include the 
following:

* UPnP is server-less. Works using multi-cast and single-cast UDP in the local 
network. (Controlling TTL and enabling IGMP in routers, can take you further 
out in the network.)
* UPnP allows you to send spontaneous notifications of existence, and also 
request notifications from devices when you need them.
* UPnP has well defined interfaces, including class definitions, with data and 
methods that can be called.
* UPnP is used in home environments.
* UPnP, as part of DLNA is also used in home entertainment systems.

With the move towards IoT, especially using IP-TV, and similar approaches, UPnP 
is a natural way to publish presence of devices with well-defined interfaces 
that can be used by IP-TV applications running on the set-top-box. Many 
set-top-boxes already have a natural API for DLNA (and therefore UPnP). I think 
It would be worth-while to define one or more UPnP interfaces for XMPP-capable 
devices.

Needless to say, I'm happy to join an effort to create such interfaces and 
related XEP(s).

Sincerely,
Peter Waher


-----Original Message-----
From: Hund, Johannes [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: den 21 maj 2013 07:30
To: XMPP Standards
Subject: Re: [Standards] Using .well-known/ to supplement XEP-0156

Hello Peter,

would you see UPNP/SSDP discovery also orthogonal to XEP-0174, which uses 
MDNS/DNS-SD a.k.a. zeroconf/Bonjour to discover xmpp clients? In that case for 
serverless p2p-Messaging.
I understood that UPNP basically does the same thing zeroconf does in terms of 
discovery, but on a more application-layer-focused approach.
Or would it make sense to offer UPNP as an alternative discovery method in 
XEP-0174?

I know the OP was about XEP-0156, but I think both XEPs are related in terms of 
out-of-band discovery methods.

Is my assumption right Both use DNS flavors, but could also be solved by UPNP?

Best regards,
Johannes

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] Im Auftrag 
von Peter Waher
Gesendet: Montag, 20. Mai 2013 19:16
An: XMPP Standards
Betreff: Re: [Standards] Using .well-known/ to supplement XEP-0156

Hello Yusuke.

Work for implementing support for UPnP (and so DLNA) into browsers has been 
done in many places. It's one of the use cases in IP-TV applications, to be 
able to connect to home entertainment equipment and Home Automation devices 
through the set-top-box, which normally runs a browser.

Support for UPnP in browsers has not been standardized (yet, anybody interested 
to create a proposal?). What people have done is creating plugins, particular 
for a given browser, being a STB-browser, Smart TV, or a more common browser 
supporting plugins, like Firefox or Opera. These plugins then publish a 
JavaScript API that allows the web applications to access UPnP (& DLNA) devices.

Some links:

http://html5.cablelabs.com/upnp/html5-upnp-integration.html
http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/network-service-discovery-api-support-in-opera/
http://upnp.org/sdcps-and-certification/resources/sdks/

I personally like UPnP & DLNA. It would be a great way to find XMPP-based 
devices, particularly IoT devices, in your vicinity, and be able to interact 
with them.

Sincerely,
Peter Waher


-----Original Message-----
From: Yusuke DOI [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: den 19 maj 2013 22:09
To: XMPP Standards
Cc: Peter Waher
Subject: Re: [Standards] Using .well-known/ to supplement XEP-0156

Peter,

(2013-05-19 03:13), Peter Waher wrote:
> What about the UPnP method? Using SSDP? Creating some well defined 
> UPnP Device interface for XMPP Servers & XMPP Clients, perhaps 
> exposing the features of each device at the same time? Saves time as 
> you don't have to do service discovery on each device.

UPnP is not for browsers and I think this is not what Lance needs.

Regards,

Yusuke




Reply via email to