Subject: [Roll] Free standards vs proprietary standards. (off-topic from the ROLL protocol)

From: Jon Smirl <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2010 11:36:58 -0500

This is my personal opinion, I'm not associated with any vendor in the
computer industry.

Why do we have approximately 40 incompatible home automation networks?
I believe this is due to the incorporation of licensed IP into each of
these networks. All of these networks offer their IP for licensing but
instead we get 40 different networks.  These networks get created
because each vendor chooses to reinvent the wheel instead of paying
fees to their competitors. I've been working in networking for over
twenty years, I can think of hundreds of ways to vary the signaling
and protocols to create even more incompatible home automation
networks. For someone experienced in the networking field it is simply
too easy to create yet another variation and avoid licensing. You can
even pitch your investors about how you'll be receiving licensing
revenue from your new system. Sure these variations may be more
inefficient, but does it really matter? What matters much more is
avoiding the licensing fees.

I have seven incompatible home automation networks in use in my house.
It has taken me forever to build bridges linking the various pieces
and these bridges are often unreliable. The vendors behind each of
these seven network islands behave like monopolists and charge
accordingly. If you aren't a software engineer you're going to be
locked into one of these islands and pay inflated prices when you
expand your network. This model results is great margins for the
vendors, but it greatly limits the available market for home
automation.  In my area it is not common to find home automation
systems until the price of the home exceeds $3M. They are non-existent
in the $500K price range.

As a consumer of these networked items I am fed up with all of the
incompatible systems. I want to be able to go down to Home Depot and
pick from two or three different dimmers with the confidence that they
will all work when I bring them home. I do not want to call an
expensive CEDIA rep to change a light switch.

If people agree with this vision, how do we achieve it? My experience
says the solution is to build a GPL licensed reference implementation
of the protocol stack. This stack could be used inside the Linux
kernel (and inside common home routers). It could also be used
standalone in conjunction with something like Contiki or TinyOS in
dimmers. The GPL is excellent neutral ground. It requires everyone to
share with each other and licenses everyone for free. For stronger
patent protection the code base could be dual licensed GPLv2 and
GPLv3.  Note that it is implementations that infringe patents, not the
standards.

The point of the GPL'd implementation is to move the competition up
the stack. Quit competing on the networking protocols and instead move
the competition higher in the stack to things like Smart Energy. A
common networking base will expand the market available to all
players.

Personally I'd like to see two things:
1) 6lowpan/ROLL added to the Linux kernel. This makes it much easier
to build IPv6 routers between WiFi and 802.15.4. All of those little
home routers will get a 802.15.4 chip and a big marketing announcement
saying "Smart Energy capable" Now a PC/Smartphone can get at power
data from smart meters. Or control a network of smart dimmers.

2) A free, GPL licensed stand-alone implementation suitable for use in
dimmers. Then encourage Asian manufacturers to flood the US market
with 300M "smart" dimmers for $40 each. This will be a cut throat, low
margin business, but it will sell a whole lot of 802.15.4 chips. Smart
dimmers help a lot with efficiency by allowing an "All Off" button
when you leave the house. Everything will be compatible since
everything will be running the same code base.

These two events should be enough to jump start the use of home
automation networks in homes at the $500K level - greatly expanding
the market. Now everyone can go back to building high margin add-ons
for these newly created customers.

-- 
Jon Smirl
[email-masked]