WoT Architecture

09 Jan 2020



Call1: Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Kunihiko_Toumura, Taki_Kamiya
Call2: Kaz_Ashimura, Michael_Lagally, Kunihiko_Toumura, Michael_Koster, Zoltan_Kis
Call1: Taki
Call2: Kaz



<taki> scribe: TK

<kaz> scribenick: taki

Lagally is going over agenda.

Lagally: we have use case templates.

Recap of architecture discussion

Lagally is looking at last architecture call minutes...

Lagally: We had lifecycle discsussion. There are different states.

Lagally is looking at lifecycle ppt slides...

<mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/blob/master/proposals/WoT%20Architecture%20Lifecycle.pptx

Lagally: we are going to summarize discussion in this document.
... We have MMI.
... We discussed new timeslot.
... main discussion last time was in the slide.


Lagally: Let's look at Pull requests.

<inserted> PR 419

Lagally: PR #419.
... Reference to Server-sent events now refers to HTML spec.
... reviewed by plehegar. Let's merge it.

Kaz: We need to create static version using respec.

PR #418

<inserted> PR 418

Lagally: we have architecture-1.1 branch.
... it is for version 1.1 work.
... Device manufacturer.
... System Provider.
... What is the difference between System Integrator and System Provider?

Kaz: Where did those terms come from?

Lagally: They are from security note.
... from Security and Provacy guideline.

Lagally is looking at section 2 of architecture doc.

Lagally is looking at section 3.2.1.

Kaz: we can merge, and take a closer look at later.

Lagally: System Integrator definition is a bit vague.

<kaz> fyi, "systems integrator" from wikipedia:
A systems integrator (or system integrator) is a person or company that specializes in bringing together component subsystems into a whole and ensuring that those subsystems function together, a practice known as system integration. They also solve problems of automation.

Lagally: We should ask Elena to refine definition before merging.

Toumura: I do not have opinion for now.


Lagally: we have "defer to next spec version" items.

<kaz> Issues

Lagally: Data streaming, video & audio treatment, we should discuss with MEIG.
... #417 is a question, we have not answered yet.

<kaz> Issue 417

Lagally: Architecture can be deployable to anywhere whether it is hypervisor or application VM.
... Zoltan made a comment in the issue.

Lagally is looking at "servient" definition...

Lagally: servient can host multiple Things.
... It can be one thing or multiple things.

Kaz: MMI WG worked on MMI architecture based on client-server model. There were several implementation styles.

Lagally: we need to discuss application lifecycle.

Kaz: some of the car vendors use micro-service architecture to implement MMI.

<inserted> Lagally: Regarding the existing application lifecycle discussion, can we discuss the MMI Architecture withing the remaining time today?

Kaz: We can quickly skim MMI architecture document, if needed..

Lagally: Let's do it next week.

Use Cases

Lagally is looking at the list of Use Cases in the agenda.

Lagally: Use cases should be relevant to industries.

Kaz: We can define application lifecycle based on WoT architecture.
... morning alarm, coffee server, toaster, microwave, fridge, TV, air conditioners. can be integrated using WoT architecture.

Lagally: Is that a new use case?

Kaz: Yes.

Lagally is adding Life companion use case...

Kaz: This is important for aged people or for accessibility.

<inserted> kaz: can work on my proposed use case :0

Lagally: For audio/video, data streaming use cases we have some descriptions in Github issues.

Toumura: I can volunteer for the discovery use case.

Lagally: Please add use case ideas if there are any more.

Kaz: Streaming use case and audio/video use case. We can get more information from the joint call with MEIG.

Lagally: any other business?

<kaz> (none)

Lagally: call1 adjorned.

<kaz> [Kaz notes that as we confirmed yesterday during the WoT main call, we'll publish the TF minutes publicly from this week :)]

Second call

<kaz> scribenick: kaz

Recap from the latest discussison

Lagally: summarizes the 1st call
... Architecture recap from the latest discussion

<mlagally> https://github.com/w3c/wot-architecture/blob/master/proposals/WoT%20Architecture%20Lifecycle.pptx

Lagally: slides on Lifecycle above

(Zoltan joins)

Lagally: summary of the lifecycle slides in Dec
... [Scope]
... terminology discussion
... [Analysis of lifecycle models]
... looked into WoT Security, IEEE, SIM cards/GSMA, IETF, Oracle
... and W3C MMI to be seen
... will look into that next week
... we should oversee important points
... should look into them probably next week
... oneM2M, OCF, etc.
... [Actors and Roles]
... list of actors: manufacturer, service provider, network provider, device owner, others
... stakeholders: represent a physical person or group of persons
... should align with the security note
... different roles: security maintainer, ...
... roles of actors can be delegated
... [Device and Consumer Lifecycles]
... several states within an application lifecycle
... may need additional states and transitions
... need to see lifecycle models
... [Proposed Terminology for...]
... manufactured, inactive, assigned, registered, onboarded/provisioned, configuration, update, maintenance, activated/live, deactivated/suspended/deprovisioned, deregistered, decomissioned/retired
... relationship with humans
... onboarded means registered with a consumer
... work in progress and need to continue the discussion
... [Lifecycle Phases]
... bootstrapping - beginning of life
... should add references
... any questions?

Koster: firmware update?
... it's kind of a security event

Lagally: security sensitive

Koster: sometimes need reconfiguration

Lagally: update includes firmware update, update of security/privacy sensitive information

Kaz: sounds to me that we might want to think about recursive nesting of state transition
... for firmware update or HDD maintenance

Lagally: right
... I'm not sure if we really need all the states here at once either

Koster: probably need some abstraction of states
... might call it "maintenance" state
... but may be wrong

Kaz: yeah
... so I'd suggest we start with some abstract model first
... and then think about concrete combinations of variations later

Lagally: if we succeed to have some small set of terminology, we can look into concrete device-level state transition next

Kaz: yeah, we can start with transition of services
... and think about devices later

Lagally: ok
... do we have any other specific states at the moment?

Koster: probably we might need super states
... this is a good starting point

Zoltan: good to have a table

Lagally: adds "normal operation" to "activated/live"
... we should not just end up the definition

Koster: a device may require credentials
... another level of details to be added
... natural boundary of application



Lagally: one remaining PR from Elena
... discussed this during the first call today
... found the definition for "system integrator" is not necessarily clear

Zoltan: maybe we can answer that later

Lagally: would ask Elena for clarification
... and would keep this PR open

Zoltan: it makes sense to differentiate the roles
... for the security note

Lagally: let's keep this open and talk with Elena next week

Zoltan: ok
... let's keep it open



Lagally: we looked into the remaining issues (for v.next)

Issue 417

Lagally: question about servient
... and several editorial issues
... and then video/audio treatment

Use cases

use case area

Lagally: initial set of use cases: cloud/big data, thing directory/discovery, data streaming (related to issue 387), audio/video (related to issue 8), life companion
... there is a template here

Use case template

Lagally: have not touched smart city use case yet
... can see more use cases to be added
... if you have any use cases to be added, please submit brief description here (on the README.md)

Next week

Lagally: discussion on Thing Lifecycle including OCF, oneM2M, W3C MMI
... questions?
... aob?


How to publish the minutes?

Kaz: because this is the first trial, we could be a bit careful
... so would suggest we ask the participants for review and finalize the minutes during the next call on Jan. 16
... we can make decision how to deal with the procedure during that call

Lagally: sounds like a plan


Summary of Action Items

Summary of Resolutions

[End of minutes]

Minutes manually created (not a transcript), formatted by David Booth's scribe.perl version 1.154 (CVS log)
$Date: 2020/01/13 08:08:56 $