Internet Research Task Force Gyu Myoung Lee
Internet Draft TELECOM SudParis
Intended status: Informational Jungsoo Park
Expires: January 2013 ETRI
Ning Kong
CNNIC
Noel Crespi
TELECOM SudParis
Ilyoung Chong
HUFS
July 30, 2012
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement
draft-lee-iot-problem-statement-05.txt
Status of this Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted to IETF in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html
This Internet-Draft will expire on January 30, 2013.
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 1]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2012 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully,
as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this
document.
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 2]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
Abstract
This document explains the concept of the Internet of Things (IoT)
and several features of the IoT. In addition, this document specifies
problems considering technical issues for the IoT. Based on this,
this document discusses architectural implications in order to solve
problems.
Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC-2119.
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 3]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ................................................ 5
2. Concept of IoT .............................................. 5
3. Features of the IoT ......................................... 6
3.1. Overall aspects......................................... 6
3.2. Applications/services aspects........................... 7
3.3. Networking aspects...................................... 7
3.4. Link/physical layer aspects............................. 7
3.5. Smart/connected objects aspects......................... 7
3.6. Smart environment aspects............................... 7
4. Problems .................................................... 7
4.1. Identifier for objects and services..................... 7
4.2. Object naming .......................................... 8
4.3. Security/privacy/authority.............................. 9
4.4. Presence (of people; of devices) ....................... 10
4.5. Geographic location (self-identification of location)... 10
4.6. Discovery/search ....................................... 10
4.7. Tracking and mobility support of mobile object.......... 10
4.8. Data processing /computing ............................. 11
4.9. Heterogeneous networking environment (IP and non-IP, etc)11
4.10. Global connectivity (IP-based) ........................ 12
4.11. Scalability ........................................... 12
4.12. Autonomics (self-configuring, intelligence for control) 13
4.13. Constraint objects .................................... 13
4.14. Web Services .......................................... 14
4.15. Various volumes of data traffic ....................... 14
5. Architectural implications .................................. 15
5.1. Vertical vs. Horizontal ................................ 15
5.2. Architectural considerations in the service perspective. 15
5.3. Common infrastructure in the networking perspective..... 16
6. Security Considerations ..................................... 17
7. IANA Considerations. ........................................ 17
8. References .................................................. 17
8.1. Normative References ................................... 17
8.2. Informative References ................................. 17
Author's Addresses ............................................. 18
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 4]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
1. Introduction
The Internet of Things (IoT) [1-3] is a novel paradigm that is
becoming popular with research and industries. The basic idea is that
IoT will connect objects around us to provide seamless communication
and contextual services provided by them. Development of RFID tags,
sensors, actuators, smart phones make it possible to materialize IoT
which interact and co-operate each other to make the service better
and accessible anytime, from anywhere.
There are so many applications that are possible because of IoT. For
individual users, IoT brings useful applications like home automation,
security, automated devices monitoring and management of daily tasks.
For professionals, automated applications provide useful contextual
information all the time to help on their works and decision making.
Industries with sensors and actuators operations can be rapid,
efficient and more economic. Managers who need to keep eye on many
things can automate tasks connection digital and physical objects
together. Every sectors energy, computing, management, security,
transportation are going to be benefitted with this new paradigm.
Development of several technologies made it possible to achieve the
vision of the IoT. Identification technology such as RFID allows each
object to represent uniquely by having unique identifier. Identity
reader can read any time the object allows real time identification
and tracking. Wireless sensor technology allows objects to provide
real time environmental condition and context. Smart technologies
allow objects to become more intelligent which can think and
communicate. Nanotechnologies are helping to reduce the size of the
chip incorporating more processing power and communication
capabilities in a very small chip.
This document explains the concept of the IoT and several features of
the IoT. In addition, this document specifies problems considering
technical issues for the IoT. This document also contains
architectural considerations in order to solve problems with feasible
technological solutions.
2. Concept of IoT
o Definition of the "IoT"
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 5]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
The "Internet of Things (IoT)" refers to the networked
interconnection of everyday objects. An "IoT" means "a world-wide
network of interconnected objects uniquely addressable, based on
standard communication protocols" [5].
o Definition and scope of "thing"
In the IoT, "thing" is object of the physical world (physical
thing) or of the information world (virtual thing), which is
capable of being identified and integrated into the communication
networks [6]. The "thing" should be identified at least by one
unique way of identification for the capability of addressing and
communicating with each other and verifying their identities.
o Visions of IoT and goals for new architecture/framework
In terms of standardization, a new paradigm of IoT implies many
visions depending on expertise of standardization bodies. Commonly
we focus on the deployment of a new generation of networked
objects with communication, sensory and action capabilities for
numerous applications with a vision "from simple connected objects
as sensor networks to more complex and smarter communicated
objects as in the envisioned IoT" [7]. In the IETF/IRTF
perspective, one of our visions is to provide global
interoperability via IP for making heterogeneous/constraint
objects very smart.
We are investigating a new architectural framework to support
scalability and interoperability for IoT as a research item. The
goals for this are to identify several problems of existing
protocols and find possible solutions for solving these problems.
3. Features of the IoT
3.1. Overall aspects
The IoT has the following features: order(s) of magnitude bigger than
the Internet, no computers or humans at endpoint, inherently mobile,
disconnected, unattended.
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 6]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
3.2. Applications/services aspects
There are many use cases among various stakeholders in IoT
environment. Each device/machine can be used for multiple
applications/services with different characteristics.
3.3. Networking aspects
It is required to provide a common communications technology that
supports all applications/services as well as heterogeneous
networking interfaces.
3.4. Link/physical layer aspects
There are various types of networking interfaces which have different
coverage and data rates. These environments have the characteristics
of low power and lossy networks like Bluetooth, IEEE 802.15.4
(6LoWPAN, ZigBee), NFC etc.
3.5. Smart/connected objects aspects
Smart/connected objects are heterogeneous with different sizes,
mobility, power, connectivity and protocols. A physical object
interacts with several entities, performs various functionalities and
generates data that might be used by other entities. Usually
resources of these objects are limited.
3.6. Smart environment aspects
Smart environment which consists of networks of federated sensors and
actuators can be extended from homes/offices to buildings/cities.
From residential home, end-to-end large scale services such as smart
cities can be considered.
4. Problems
4.1. Identifier for objects and services
There are various kinds of identifier with different identification
codes according to objects and their services. Current identification
schemes for objects are also different from their purposes.
Technical considerations:
o Identification (new naming space, globally unique ID)
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 7]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
With the huge evolved communication objects, the hierarchical
identification schemes are required. The aggregation feature of
IPv6 address is one of example.
According to the classification of "Things", the different
identification schemes are required. That is, the information such
as books, medicine and clothes may not require the global
identification because revocation lists are required. It means
some objects will be destroyed.
4.2. Object naming
Current Internet just identifies the specific server which contents
are stored. As the end points of current Internet are hosts,
individual content in a server cannot be identified in the network.
Technical considerations:
o Object naming services
The name service of Internet such as DNS (Domain Name System)
[RFC1034] has already been one of the most important
infrastructures of the Internet nowadays. For example, DNS is an
indispensable system of the Internet used for translating the
"human-friendly" host names of computers on a TCP/IP network into
their corresponding "machine-friendly" IP addresses. In general,
DNS also stores other types of information, such as the list of
mail servers that accept email for a given Internet domain. By
providing a worldwide, distributed name service, DNS is an
essential component of the functionality of the Internet.
Similarly, object name service will also be one of essential and
key elements in the IoT, which can be used for translating the
"thing-friendly" names of object which maybe belong to
heterogeneous name spaces (e.g. EPC, uCode, and any other self-
defined code) on different networks (e.g. TCP/IP network,
constrained network) into their corresponding "machine-friendly"
addresses or other related information of another TCP/IP or
constrained network. The object of IoT based on a TCP/IP or
constrained network can easily communicate with other object on
the same or any other network with the name of the object by
object name service, without considering whether the address of
the targeted object has been changed or not.
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 8]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
To fulfill the aforementioned objective, object naming service
based on the IoT needs to be researched. The compatibility of
heterogeneous name spaces and the efficiency for the constrained
network of this kind of service are supposed to be the most
important issues to be studied in future.
4.3. Security/privacy/authority
The loss of security and privacy in communications and services, with
personal data is becoming available and unwanted communication
becoming rampant.
The overall problem is further aggravated by the diversification of
the Internet with new types of devices and heterogeneous networks.
The user is confronted with a wide range of methods and devices with
which to access the digital world, and it can no longer be assumed
that a single, independent access per device will suffice, nor that
the user will actually own all these devices.
Using identities as representations of entities of all kinds as the
end points of communications, the handling of the privacy of data in
the network and the infrastructure is key issues to solve problems
associated with the diversifying of the Internet towards an IoT, and
to be reachable in the digital world [8].
Technical considerations:
o ID-management for objects (security, authentication, privacy)
Basically each object should not be able to authenticate during
the short time because the hundreds of objects may request the
approval at the same time. Therefore, group authentication and
authorization methods are required.
o Trustworthy networking
Confidentiality, authenticity and trustworthiness of communication
partners need to be maintained. Users need to give objects limited
service access not allowing them to communicate in uncontrolled
manner.
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 9]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
4.4. Presence (of people; of devices)
Key challenging issue is to develop a mechanism which accepts, stores
and distributes presence information with the relationship between
people and devices.
Technical considerations:
o Awareness of presence
4.5. Geographic location (self-identification of location)
For IoT applications/services, we need to know the physical location
of objects and the location of information from objects. Problems are
how to identify location information related to objects with
autonomic way.
Technical considerations:
o Awareness of location
4.6. Discovery/search
Every object can be a source of information. Information from object
should be stored and discovered through searching in order to use it
by persons. For this, semantic and context information can be used.
Technical considerations:
o Tools for information modeling of objects
Characterizing of objects using semantic and ontology technologies
are required. Suitable services for objects must be automatically
identified. As users want to know objects information and their
availability all the time, it requires appropriate semantic means
of describing their functionalities.
4.7. Tracking and mobility support of mobile object
To support the routing and mobility protocols, the IoT networks have
structural characteristics. That is, the mobility support models are
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 10]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
required. Some objects move independently. Others will move as the
one of group. Therefore, according the moving feature, the different
tracking methods are required. It is important to provide ubiquitous
and seamless communication among objects while tracking the location
of objects.
Technical considerations:
o Location-based mobility support for mobile objects
4.8. Data processing /computing
For supporting various applications in the IoT environment,
information should be able to transfer among objects operating under
varied perspectives without humans.
Technical considerations:
o Information model (data store, retrieval, transfer, etc.)
According the Information model, the functionality of data
processing should be distinguished.
o Policy/preferences
4.9. Heterogeneous networking environment (IP and non-IP, etc.)
Objects have different communication, information and processing
capabilities. Each object would also be subjected to very different
conditions such as power energy availability and communication
bandwidth requirement. Networking interfaces of objects are
heterogeneous in terms of coverage, date rate, etc. For communicating
among objects, both IP and non-IP interfaces should be supported for
providing interoperability among heterogeneous interfaces.
Technical considerations:
o Interworking model with proxy (gateway)
Each gateway should support the multiple interfaces, which are
evolved in different heterogeneous networks.
o Interoperability
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 11]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
In order to facilitate communication and cooperation common
practices and standards are required. Interoperability solution
should be maintained to provide seamless interaction among them.
Service description, publishing, and discovery mechanisms should
be interoperable otherwise the IoT will be converted into islands
of heterogeneous object network.
o Device adaptation
Each connected objects should be able to adapt the situation where
it is now. When a person with smart phone enters home, it should
adapt communication mechanism, addressing and localized
environment. When it reaches in office environment it should adapt
with new situation where the mechanisms available in home can be
different. Adaption in many senses should be maintained.
4.10. Global connectivity (IP-based)
Each object should support the end-to-end communications. And also
outside-initiated services may be supported into the inner network.
For global interoperability, IP is considered for communicating smart
objects.
Technical considerations:
o IPv6 protocol
To solve scalability regarding addressing, object-to-object
communication needs huge number of IP addresses in order to
uniquely identify each objects. As a scalable solution, IPv6 can
be used which can accommodate as many things as required to
include in the IoT. Using IPv6 with abundant address spaces,
globally unique connectivity can be provided without additional
processing.
4.11. Scalability
All of objects are highly distributed with ubiquity features (e.g.,
any where, any time). Scalable solutions are necessary in the
distributed networking environment.
Technical considerations:
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 12]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
o ID/LOC separation
In IETF LISP, Shim6 and Other WG, ID/LOC separation methods have
been developing. For more scalable and robust network, ID/LOC
separation features are required.
4.12. Autonomics (self-configuring, intelligence for control)
For self-configuration, a problem is how a device needs to establish
its connection automatically with a plug and play manner. In addition,
for intelligent control, a problem is how a device can understand a
message for control (e.g., command).
Technical considerations:
o Remote control and management/maintenance of objects
Solutions for remote control and management without human
intervention are required to support various kinds of intelligent
applications/services using smart objects.
For example, IPv6 auto-configuration and multi-homing features are
useful for the autonomics. The scope-based IPv6 addressing
features are easily applied for self-configuration such as smart
building and smart grid.
4.13. Constraint objects
Like the Full-function device (FFD) and Reduced Function Devices
(RFD) in sensor network, the objects of IoT should be classified in
viewpoint of functionalities.
For constraint objects which do not have enough power, memory,
computing, to develop lightweight protocols for minimizing energy
consumption is essential. However, these protocols do not have enough
capabilities compared to conventional protocol which is running on
always-on devices with enough power.
Technical considerations:
o Coordination among constraint objects
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 13]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
Through the collaboration of objects with full functionalities,
required capabilities can be provided to constraint objects.
o Energy efficient protocol for constraint objects
Energy efficient communication mechanisms are essential. Active
and sleep mode operation can be a possible solution.
4.14. Web Services
Each object may be identified through the web services. It means that
the object should be identified by the URL/URL. For web of objects,
it is required to invent technologies for leveraging real-world
object exposed using Web on the Representational State Transfer
(REST) interface.
Technical considerations:
o Light-weight Web protocols
4.15. Various volumes of data traffic
Depending on application and use cases there is variance in data
volume. In a scenario where there is brief collaboration among
objects data volume will be less. However, in case where there are
large number of objects and interact among very frequently there are
large volume of data.
Technical considerations:
o Efficient processing of data traffic with different granularities
How to handle various volumes of data traffic is one of the
important challenges. From network perspective it is difficult to
handle bulk amount of data if objects produce huge bytes of data
regularly or irregularly. In addition, if the number of object in
a network significantly increases, it also causes traffic
congestion. Solution can be periodic communication between objects
or some data compression, aggregation and optimization techniques.
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 14]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
5. Architectural implications
This document has explained the concept of the IoT and several
features of the IoT. In addition, this document has specified
problems considering technical issues for the IoT.
Based on this, it is required to find possible solutions for each
problem. It would be a good starting point to consider a new
architectural framework in order to solve problems. Thus, various
issues on the architecture for IoT are discussed in this section.
5.1. Vertical vs. Horizontal
From technical problems for IoT, the current standards should require
extension of the architectural principles of both vertical (from
link/physical to service/application) and horizontal (one
object(user) to other object(user) through local networks as well as
global Internet infrastructure) perspectives.
In the vertical aspect, more studies should require in networking
capabilities for control and operation of various services over
complicated stacks of different layer technologies. In horizontal
aspects, further enhancements of user-centric communication
capabilities should take into account the complex user situations
including various devices connected to home networks and various
access technologies which support convergence. These capabilities are
necessary to support the ubiquitous networking to provide seamlessly
interconnection between humans and objects for Any Services, Any Time,
Any Where, Any Devices and Any Networks.
5.2. Architectural considerations in the service perspective
In the service perspective, a target goal of architecture design is
to support various applications using a common communication
infrastructure. For this, service oriented architecture, open service
platform and overly networks are considered.
o Service oriented architecture
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 15]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
Objects are becoming smarter with the continual augmentation of
communication and computing capabilities. Service Oriented
Architecture (SOA) based programming, which was initially used for
complex, and rather static business data sharing can now be used
for small objects [9]. Objects can offer their functionalities
using the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP) or the REST
Application Programming Interface (API) based approaches [10].
This allows objects to interact dynamically. Devices that provide
their functionality as a web service can be used by other entities
such as business applications or even other devices.
o Open service platform
Open service platform is required for promoting integrated and
interoperable IoT services while easily interworking with existing
service platform based on open standards.
o Overlay networks (Service overlay)
For deployment of abstract services, logical networks on top of a
physical infrastructure are created. These networks have an
overlay topology that logically interconnects all the
participating nodes/objects in the physical network.
5.3. Common infrastructure in the networking perspective
In the networking perspective, common infrastructure should provide
scalable, interoperable solutions to support abundant of
communicating nodes/objects.
o New concepts of networking
For stimulating interactions among connected objects with
efficient way, new concepts of networking are also required. We
need to investigate feasibility of those technologies. The
followings are some examples:
- User-centric networking
- Data-centric networking
- Content(Information)-centric networking
o Interoperable end-to-end model
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 16]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
TBD
o Integrating of smart objects
Common infrastructure for IoT should provide functionalities for
integrating of smart objects.
6. Security Considerations
TBD
7. IANA Considerations
This document has no actions for IANA.
8. References
8.1. Normative References
TBD
8.2. Informative References
[1] ITU-T Internet Reports, "Internet of Things," November 2005.
[2] Zouganeli E., Svinnset, I.E, "Connected objects and the
Internet of things-a paradigm shift," Photonics in Switching
2009, September 2009.
[3] Harald Sundmaeker, Patrick Guilemin, Peter Friess, Sylvie
Woelffle, "Vision and challenges for realizing the Internet of
Things," March 2010.
[4] Luigi Atzori, Antonio Iera, Giacomo Morabito, "The Internet of
Things: A survey," Computer Networks, Volume 54, Issue 15,
pp.2787-2805, October 2010.
[5] Maarten Botterman, "Internet of Things: an early reality of the
Future Internet," Workshop Report, European Commission
Information Society and Media, May 2009.
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 17]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
[6] ITU-T Y.2060, "Overview of Internet of Things," June 2012.
[7] White paper, "Smart networked objects and Internet of Things,"
Association Instituts Carnot, January 2011.
[8] Amardeo Sarma, Joao Girao, "Identities in the Future Internet
of Things," Wireless Pers Comm., 2009.
[9] Guinard, D., Trifa, V., Karnouskos, S., Spiess, P., Savio, D.,
"Interacting with the SOA-based Internet of things: Discovery,
Query, Selection, and On-Demand Provisioning of Web
Services," IEEE Services Computing, IEEE Transactions, vol.3,
no.3, July-Sept. 2010.
[10] Malatras, A., Asgari, A., Bauge, T., "Web enabled wireless
sensor networks for facilities management," IEEE Systems
Journal, vol.2, no.4, Dec. 2008.
[11] Joachim W. Walewski, Alain. Pastor, "The Internet of Things -
use cases and requirements," work in progress, <draft-walewski-
iot-use-case-00.txt>, July 2011.
[RFC1034] P. Mockapetris, "Domain names-concepts and facilities,"
November 1987.
Author's Addresses
Gyu Myoung Lee
Institut Mines-TELECOM, TELECOM SudParis
9 rue Charles Fourier, 91011, Evry, France
Phone: +33 (0)1 60 76 41 19
Email: gm.lee@it-sudparis.eu
Jungsoo Park
ETRI/SRC
161 Gajeong-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-700, Korea
Phone: +82 42 860 6514
Email: fnumber@gmail.com
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 18]
The Internet of Things - Concept and Problem Statement July 2012
Ning Kong
CNNIC
4 South 4th Street, Zhongguancun, Haidian District, Beijing, 100190,
China.
Phone: +86 10 5881 3147
Email: nkong@cnnic.cn
Noel Crespi
Institut Mines-TELECOM, TELECOM SudParis
9 rue Charles Fourier, 91011, Evry, France
Phone: +33 (0)1 60 76 46 23
Email: noel.crespi@it-sudparis.eu
Ilyoung Chong
Hankuk University of Foreign Studies (HUFS)
81, Oedae-ro, Mohyeon-myeon, Cheoin-gu,Yongin-si, Gyeongi-do, 449-791,
Korea
Phone: +82-31-330-4229
Email: iychong@hufs.ac.kr
Lee, et al. Expires January 30, 2013 [Page 19]