From: Salvatore D'Agostino [mailto:sal@idmachines.com]
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2014 9:45 AM
To: 'j stollman'; 'Andrew Hughes'
Cc: 'dg-idot@kantarainitiative.org'
Subject: RE: [DG-IDoT] Terminology discussion
Jeff,
These are a limited number of examples, I picked EU, vendor (Matrikon
(Honeywell) and Siemens ) and the IEC on purpose so as not to require a lot
of viewing and getting some cross sections to the list from time to time. I
am sympathetic to the big link dump, unfun as you point out, sorry if this
came across that way.
Andrew, please pass on the protégé link when it makes sense, there is also
an attribute description there from Keith Hazelton there.
Ingo to your point about sensor, actuator, gateway. There are a few
different ways this gets implemented depending on the intelligence in the
sensor or gateway Here are some GE, Cisco and Qualcomm pictures that look
at this a higher and lower views (GE and Cisco up a level, Qualcomm showing
the circuit board to support this I attached the related cut sheet <-
talked about this with Paul M on the list). Figured we might discuss this
today. Regards Sal
cid:image005.png@01CF21BA.2A205770
From: dg-idot-bounces@kantarainitiative.org
[mailto:dg-idot-bounces@kantarainitiative.org] On Behalf Of j stollman
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2014 1:23 PM
To: Andrew Hughes
Cc: dg-idot@kantarainitiative.org
Subject: Re: [DG-IDoT] Terminology discussion
I have a request for the group.
I am sure that I am not unique in having very little free time to devote to
pro bono activities such as IDoT. I may be unique in being a particularly
slow reader. When I get a note that provides a bunch of links, I glaze over
at the prospect of having been given a large reading assignment. It would
be helpful to me -- and, hopefully, to others, if contributors would provide
some brief summary of each link so that we have a basis to prioritize which
ones we read and which ones we don't. I recognize that this adds a burden
to the contributor. But, if I am not alone in my perspective, it may be of
overall benefit to the group.
Thank you.
Jeff
On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 10:46 AM, Andrew Hughes
Am 31.01.2014 um 22:59 schrieb "Salvatore D'Agostino"
: +1 Andrew,
ithin+the+Internet+of+Things
"The purpose of this paper is to describe identity concepts in the Internet of Things. Identity mechanisms in the Internet of Things are different from those in the classic web.
Furthermore this paper proposes a terminology for Identity management in
Internet of Things. This should help to facilitate discussions and work in this area without the need to define basic terms again."
Agree we don't need to propose a terminology. Trying to wean any conversation about terminology out of my existence in fact ;-)
So maybe we can work on the abstract text before we go any further.
I like wading into identifiers as Scott has done. (I just trimmed a sentence and would like to talk more about this section).
From: dg-idot-bounces@kantarainitiative.org [mailto:dg-idot-bounces@kantarainitiative.org] On Behalf Of Andrew Hughes Sent: Friday, January 31, 2014 3:31 PM To: Ingo.Friese@telekom.de Cc: dg-idot@kantarainitiative.org Subject: Re: [DG-IDoT] Terminology discussion
Hi Ingo - I'm lurking on the list so have probably missed the context if
https://kantarainitiative.org/confluence/display/IDoT/Concepts+of+Identity+w the the
terminology discussion.
Having just experienced a couple of drawn out vocabulary working groups, I am wondering why IDoT is not attempting to simply adopt a vocabulary/ontology/list of terms from any of the IoT specific groups.
Then, the focus here could be extensions to deal with the ID aspects...
Andrew.
On Friday, January 31, 2014,
wrote: Dear All, Jeff started with Sensor, Actuator and Processor. I'd like to extend this model a bit. Because I think the processor could be either near to the actuator (e.g. the processor in a house regulates the heating because of sensor data. This "intelligence" could also be somewhere in the cloud/internet. The processor could be a service on a server somewhere or and app on a smartphone. So I'd like to add an IoT instance in the network.
A second point are intermediates or gateways (names are to be discussed). Because many solutions have one or more instances between sensor/actuator an the service in the cloud. Here e.g. several sensors are concentrated.
What do you think?
Best, Ingo
-- Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP Independent Consultant In Turn Information Management Consulting +1 250.888.9474 tel:%2B1%20250.888.9474 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8 AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/ Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security
_______________________________________________ DG-IDoT mailing list DG-IDoT@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idot
-- Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP Independent Consultant In Turn Information Management Consulting +1 250.888.9474 tel:%2B1%20250.888.9474 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8 AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/ Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security -- Andrew Hughes CISM CISSP Independent Consultant In Turn Information Management Consulting +1 250.888.9474 tel:%2B1%20250.888.9474 1249 Palmer Road, Victoria, BC V8P 2H8 AndrewHughes3000@gmail.com ca.linkedin.com/pub/andrew-hughes/a/58/682/ Identity Management | IT Governance | Information Security _______________________________________________ DG-IDoT mailing list DG-IDoT@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idot -- Jeff Stollman stollman.j@gmail.com 1 202.683.8699 Truth never triumphs its opponents just die out. Science advances one funeral at a time. Max Planck