Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Two new Internet Drafts (Independent Submissions)

From: Neng Geng Huang <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2014 09:23:56 +0800

Hi! Carsten, and everybody:

I am so sorry that I disturbed you by post the Independent Submissions here.
It is because that I didn't get any notification or decision after the
submission.

I designed the UTID and IDTP that helps to build a network application with
simple design. I would like to find interested persons to discuss this
issue.

This is the last message I post to this mail list. I appreciated you if you
can give
 me any comments and suggestions in personal email. Especially where and how
to find interested persons to discuss this issue.

Best regards.

Huang

Date: Sun, 6 Jul 2014 23:52:38 +0200
From: Carsten Bormann <[email-masked]>
To: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Cc: Neng Geng Huang <[email-masked]>, "[email-masked]"
        <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Two new Internet Drafts (Independent
        Submissions)
Message-ID: <[email-masked]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

On 06 Jul 2014, at 17:20, Barry Leiba <[email-masked]> wrote:

> https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-huangng-idtp/

After a cursory check:

I do not think this is a complete specification of a protocol, so it is
hard to say anything definite.

It seems to be interested in some of the use cases of CoAP, and I wonder
why it doesn?t discuss its relationship with CoAP, which has been around
since before this work started.  The draft does mention HTTP, but only in a
superficial way as in [IDTP] "is similar to HTTP, Web Service, Java RMI, or
CORBA.?  It says it maps to TCP, UDP, and HTTP, but doesn?t say how (it
does say it uses port 25604 for TCP, which indeed has been allocated in
2011).

I was hoping to find some answers in the reference implementation, which
has some 7000 lines of Java.
There you can find gems such as an XOR ?encryption?.
As the drafts didn't really help me find out about their motivation, I was
interested to find an ?overview.html? there that has to say this:

> 1.4 Why a new protocol?
>
> There are various coding system and communication protocols widely used
in the IOT. The EPC and Web Service are the typical that makes a great
contributes to the development of IOT. However, any technology inevitably
has some disadvantages. For example, EPC is mainly used in identify
products in production process and shipping goods in logistics and is the
best coding system in the context. But in the era of IOT, after being
produced, a product will go through circulation process, storage process,
and consumption process. The same product might need to be recoded in
different process by different company using different coding system to
provide and share the information of the same product in the different
status from different company. For example, no company would like to
identify its fixed assets using EPC system, which is originally designed
for identify products. The problem is that the communication among these
different company and different coding system. The result is the
 producer is difficult to trace the outgoing process and the consumer is
difficult to find the information in the circulation process except the
producer. Another example is IP protocol, the key technology in the
Internet. But it could not be applied to a network consists of sensors that
do not have IP address.
>
> In generally, we need a coding system and a protocol that are more open,
more generalized. This specification provides such an open solution that is
independent to any industry or any context.

I gave up there, because I cannot make sense of this.

Gr??e, Carsten

-- 
------------------------------
Mr. Huang Neng Geng
------------------------------
Associate Professor
School of the Internet of Things
Wuxi Institute of Technology
Wuxi, Jiangsu, China, 214121
Mobile: 86-13921501950
email: [email-masked]