Sal, Thank you for forwarding this graphic. I find this graphic intriguing, and a good straw man starting point. But I am concerned that it is misleading. In the enthusiasm to try to leverage the successful pattern of the OSI model, we are force-fitting IoT into a model that doesn't quite work. Specifically, I have the following immediate concerns: 1. IoT in this model seems to be limited to "sensors". I don't see how the Big Data layers apply to "actuators." And I don't see how the "processors" conform to any but Layers 5 and 6. Perhaps I am being narrow-minded in clinging to the notion of IoT as representing sensors, processors, and actuators (and applications?). 2. I am uncomfortable with the notion that the Cloud layer is a necessary layer. Many IoT implementations are highly localized and will not require the Cloud or Big Data. I suspect that other concerns will arise as we look at it longer. I find that this model represents one view on one part of IoT. It may be a big and important part. But I don't think it is adequate to define all of IoT. And I fear that it will force people into thinking about IoT in only this way and lose sight of effective and efficient solutions that do not conform to this model. Jeff --------------------------------- 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 On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 8:54 AM, Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:
[image: https://image-store.slidesharecdn.com/6eb9890a-3615-4dd8-9cd7-7e56d0be5518-o...]
Salvatore D'Agostino
IDmachines LLC
1264 Beacon Street, #5
Brookline, MA 02446
USA
http://idmachines.blogspot.com
@idmachines
+1 617.201.4809 ph
+1 617.812.6495 fax
_______________________________________________ DG-IDoT mailing list DG-IDoT@kantarainitiative.org http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/dg-idot
