1
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
2. Industrial Developments
2
Section 2 - Overview
2. Industrial Developments2.1 Standardization Bodies2.2 Startups2.3 Conclusions
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
3
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
2.1 Standardization Bodies
4
What are Standards?
• Normative standardization documents are– elaborated by a community– publicly available without any discriminatory conditions– published by Standards Developing Organizations (SDOs)
• SDO (Standards Developing Organization):– publish standards which – rely upon national or international regulations
• Further facts about standards:– pushed for by consortia or forums– popularity is reflected by the market – serve as references for compliance purposes
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
5
Benefit of Standards
• Service Providers benefit because– they can design, develop and operate a wide range of services– whatever the underlying but standard-compliant, heterogeneous technologies
• Vendors benefit because – they can access markets more easily with standard-compliant products– proprietary technologies are restricted to niche markets (at best)– at the risk of blurring competitive differentiation
• Customers benefit because – they can access a wide range of services– without the burden of being tied to a given service provider or technology
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
6
Corporate View
• Standardization as a profitable business:– defend business stakes– promote patents through the enforcement of a consistent IPR policy
• Standardization as a decision-making tool:– privileged space for consolidating and developing leadership positions
• Speed up the introduction of new products and/or services:– facilitated by a set of available standards
• Slow down the standardization process:– to extend the lifetime of an already-introduced yet proprietary product or service
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
7
Regulatory View
• Technology space is very complex:– stringent regulations are hence needed– to facilitate control and possible billing (e.g. UMTS spectrum license)
• Standards serve as the technical references for regulation rules:– European directives and derived domestic laws– part of the legal resolution of conflicts between competitors – and/or customers and service providers
• Part of the corporate strategy:– corporate solutions evolve in a regulated manner– mainly if regulators see a (financial) opportunity
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
8
Standardization Bodies
• Standards Developing Organization bodies can be – international (e.g. ITU-T, ISO, IEEE), – regional (e.g. ANSI, ETSI), or – national (e.g. CCSA)
• Standardization efforts pertinent to WSNs are:– IEEE (link and physical layer solutions)– ETSI (complete M2M solutions)– ISA (regulation for control systems)
– IETF (routing and network solutions)
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
9
IEEE – Overview
• Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers:– is one of the leading standards-making organizations in the world – Standardization through IEEE Standards Association (IEEE-SA)
• IEEE standards affect a wide range of industries: – power and energy– biomedical and healthcare– information technology– telecommunications– transportation– nanotechnology, etc.
• IEEE has close to 900 active standards, with 500 standards under development.
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
10
IEEE – The 802 “soup”• 802.1 High Level Interface (HILI) Working Group• 802.3 CSMA/CD (Ethernet) Working Group• 802.11 Wireless LAN (WLAN) Working Group• 802.15 Wireless Personal Area Network (WPAN) Working Group
– TG1 – WPAN, Bluetooth– TG3c - mmWave– TG4c - WPAN Alternative PHY for China– TG4d - WPAN Alternative PHY for Japan– TG4e - WPAN Enhancements– TG4f - RFID– TG4g - Smart Utility Neighborhood– TG5 - WPAN Mesh Networking– TG6 - Body Area Networks – TG7 - Visible Light Communication– IGthz - Interest Group Terahertz– WNG - Standing Committee Wireless Next Generation
• 802.16 Broadband Wireless Acces s (BWA) Working Group• 802.17 Resilient Packet Ring (RPR) Working Group• 802.18 Radio Regulatory Technical Advisory Group• 802.19 Coexistence Technical Advisory Group• 802.20 Mobile Broadband Wireless Acces s Working Group• 802.21 Media Independent Handover Working Group• 802.22 Wireless Regional Area Networks Working Group
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
11
IEEE – WSN Related Standards
• The IEEE usually standardizes:– PHY layer of the transmitter – MAC protocol rules
• The following IEEE standards are applicable to WSNs:– IEEE 802.15.4 (technology used by ZigBee and IETF 6LowPan)– IEEE 802.15.1 (technology used by Bluetooth/WiBree)– IEEE 802.11x (technology used by WiFi)
• Some facts and comments:– IEEE 802.15.4 has been the obvious choice but will get – serious competition from ultra-low power (ULP) IEEE 802.15.1 (WiBree)– low power IEEE 802.11 solutions are emerging (e.g. Marvell)
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
12
IETF – Overview
• Internet Engineering Task Force:– formed in 1986– not approved by the US government– composed of individuals, not companies– quoting the spirit: “We reject kings, presidents and voting. We believe in rough
consensus and running code.” D. Clark, 1992
• Quick overview on the IETF:– meets 3 times a year, and gathers an average of 1,300 individuals– more than 120 active working groups organized into 8 areas– IETF management (including area directors) is chosen by the community
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
13
IETF – Overview
• General scope of IETF:– above the wire/link and below the application– TCP/IP protocol suite: IP, TCP, routing protocols, etc.
• However, layers are getting fuzzy:– MAC & application layers influence routing in WSN– hence a constant exploration of "edges"
• Some curiosities:– there is no formal recognition for IETF standards by governments or SDOs– IETF publications are very interesting for SDOs because of quick implementation
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
14
IETF – WSN Related Standards
• IETF 6LoWPAN [2005]– add IPv6 capabilities to wireless sensors– end-to-end connectivity to/from the Internet
• IETF ROLL [2007]– identify application domains– define a routing protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks
• IETF 6LoWApp [2009]– what goes on top of IP?– brand new…
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
15
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
2.2 Startups
16
Dust Networks [US]
• Dust Networks facts:– founded in 2002 by industry pioneer Prof. Kris Pister, Berkeley, USA– vision of a world of ubiquitous sensing – a world of connected sensors scattered around
like specs of dust, or smart dust, gathering information economically and reliably, that had previously been impractical or impossible to acquire
– inventors of TSMP which are used in ISA100, Wireless HART and IEEE 802.15.4E– emphasis on industrial control
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
17
Arch Rock [US]
• Arch Rock facts:– founded in May 2005 with a vision of providing a high quality, seamless integration of the
physical and virtual worlds that would enhance the information awareness of the individual and the enterprise
– company builds upon a decade of research at the University of California, Berkeley and Intel Research by David Culler et al.
– founder of a new operating system, TinyOS and Berkeley Mote, for small wirelessly connected computers that sense the physical environment and form vast embedded networks; emphasis on environmental monitoring & ind. control
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
18
Crossbow [US]
• Crossbow facts:– Global Leader in Sensory Systems; founded in 1995 by Mike Horton– Products MEMS-Based Inertial Systems & Wireless Sensor Networking– World-Wide Employee Base; Headquartered in San Jose, CA– $25M in Venture Capital– Cisco Systems, Intel Corporation, Morgenthaler Ventures, Paladin Capital– emphasis on asset management & tracking
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
19
Coronis/Elster [FR, US]
• Coronis, France, (now bought by Elster, USA) in short:
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
20
Sensinode [FI]
• Sensinode facts:– leader in IP-based wireless sensor network (WSN) technology– 1st on the market with a 6lowpan stack– 6lowpan products and services: 6lowpan Devkits, Network Products, NanoStack 6lowpan
Stack– Engineering Services– Sensinode is headquartered in Finland– A 2005 spin-off of the University of Oulu, Finland based on a decade of research
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
21
Worldsensing [ES]
• Worldsensing facts:– addressing Smart Parking/City, Smart Construction, Smart-* markets– winner of IBM Smart Camp London 2010 competition– intelligent technology and software providing end-to-end solutions
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
22
etc.
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
Adurahttp://www.aduratech.com/
Berkeley Lighting control
Arch Rockhttp://www.archrock.com/
Berkeley
Elster Coronishttp://www.coronis.com/
Montpellier, France Automated Meter Reading
Crossbowhttp://www.xbow.com/
Berkeley
Dust Networkshttp://www.dustnetworks.com/
Berkeley Industrial Automation
Emberhttp://www.ember.com/
MIT
Federspiel Controlshttp://www.federspielcontrols.com/
Berkeley HVAC
Libeliumhttp://www.libelium.com/
Zaragoza, Spain
Maxforhttp://www.maxfor.co.kr/
Seongnam, South Korea
Millenial Nethttp://www.millennial.net/
MIT Smart Energy
Sensicast Systemshttp://www.sensicast.com/
Pinpoint
Sensinodehttp://www.sensinode.com/
Oulu, Finland
Sensys Networkshttp://www.sensysnetworks.com/
Berkeley Traffic light sensor
Sentilla (was MoteIV)http://www.sentilla.com/
Berkeley
Skywise Systemshttp://www.skywisesystems.com/
Beijing, China
Smartgrainshttp://www.smartgrains.com/
Paris, France Smart Parking
Streetline Networkshttp://www.streetlinenetworks.com/
Berkeley Smart Parking
23
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010
2.3 Conclusions
24
Conclusions
• The Past– loads of proprietary wireless solutions have been mushrooming over past decade– no or little inter-operability between these solutions– danger of de-fragmented market is a reality
• The Present– proprietary solutions are still being developed and pushed for– however, standardization is wrapping up at all layers of the stack
• The Future– integration of the to-be-finalized standards– realization of Internet-of-Things
Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010