Hi folks, I promised to see if I could think of something sensible to say about IOT-Events.
My core concern here is that this spec (http://xmpp.org/extensions/inbox/iot-events.html) is designed such that one entity can publish events, to which assorted other entities can subscribe, which fundamentally sounds like pubsub, for which we have some coverage in XEP-0060. IOT-Events comes up with a completely new syntax for both the subscribing and the publishing from that described in XEP-0060, and I'd like to see if there is common ground for sharing syntax (and, ideally, semantics). I note at this point that re-use of XEP-0060 syntax would not imply the use of central pubsub services on components or servers. In IOT-Events, a Thing is its own (IOT-Events)pubsub service; I'm interested in seeing if they could be their own (XEP-0060 subset)pubsub service instead. I suggest we define a standard form that can hold the subscription options in IOT-Events, so example 1: <iq type='get' from='[email protected]/amr' to='[email protected]' id='S0001'> <subscribe xmlns='urn:xmpp:iot:events' seqnr='1' momentary='true' maxInterval='PT5M' req='true'/> </iq> would become something a bit like <iq type='get' from='[email protected]/amr' to='[email protected]' id='S0001'> <pubsub xmlns='http://jabber.org/protocol/pubsub'> <subscribe node='somethings' jid='[email protected]/amr'/> <options> <x xmlns='jabber:x:data' type='submit'> <field var='FORM_TYPE' type='hidden'> <value>http://jabber.org/protocol/pubsub#subscribe_options</value> </field> <field var='iot#seqnr'><value>1</value></field> <field var='iot#momentary'><value>true</value></field> <field var='maxInterval'><value>PT5M</value></field> <field var='pubsub#deliver'><value>1</value></field> </x> </options> </pubsub> </iq> These fields can be standardised in IOT-Events such that discovery is not necessary, and the number of roundtrips remains the same. What do folks think of this as a starting point? (There are further questions that need answering about this approach later...) /K
