Summit 16: Bridging Open Source & Open Standards - Oma Survey Results

June 20–23, 2016 | Berlin, Germany

Survey Results: Bridging the Gap Between Open Standards and Open Source

Elizabeth Rose, Open Mobile Alliance

OMA’s Motivation

• Two years ago, OMA started on a journey to understand how it could improve adoption of its service-layer specifications.

• Very quickly we found that Developers are key to widespread adoption.• We began to create an ecosystem of tools and collaboration around our

specifications that allowed for Developers to implement the specifications more easily.

• https://github.com/OpenMobileAlliance/OMA_LwM2M_for_Developers/wiki• We also ran into the fact that the Developer community is highly oriented

toward open source code, projects, tools and associations.• We launched the survey in an attempt to find better data about how our

traditional telco-oriented members are approaching Open Source and how that direction compares to a wider sample.

Survey background

• The purpose of the survey is to help OMA understand the role Open Source Software and Open Source Associations play in our industry.

• Understand prevailing attitudes regarding Open Source and Open Standards.• Examine what (if anything) OMA should be doing to better serve its members

and the industry at large in relation to Open Source projects.• The survey population:

• The industry at large as serviced by the OMA marketing database and social media

• Survey responses – 419 individual responses including hundreds of text-based, open-ended answers.

• A summary of the survey will be available on the OMA website and will be sent to those who participated in the survey

Public Survey OMA membership breakdown

22%

55%

23%

Is your company a member of the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA)?

Yes No I don't know

Sampling of companies of respondents

Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.







Companies of respondents

12%9%

10%

29%

40%

Indicate your company's primary business:

Mobile operator Network equipment vendorMobile device vendor Software developerOther (please specify)

Open Standards definition

99%

1%Agree

Disagree

OpenStandardsarebestdefinedasdocumentsmadeavailabletothegeneralpublic,whicharedeveloped(orapproved)andmaintainedviaamanaged,collaborative,transparent,andconsensus-drivenprocess."OpenStandards"facilitateinteroperabilityanddataexchangeamongdifferentproductsorservicesandareintendedforwidespreadadoption.(adaptedfromITU-Tdefinition)

98%

2% Agree

Disagree

Open Source projects definition

Public

Open Source projects are best defined as programs in which the source code is available to the general public for use and/or modification from its original design that is made available under an open source license. Open source code is typically created as a collaborative effort in which programmers improve upon the code and often share the changes among the programming community for such projects. At a high level, open source licenses allow users the freedom to use, modify, and distribute the source code without requiring any further permissions.

OS Project participation

52%25%

23%

Is your company participating in Open Source communities or projects that are relevant to Telecommunications or IOT?

Yes No Not Sure


IfyourcompanyisparticipatinginOpenSourceassociationsthatarerelevanttoTelecommunicationsorIOT,pleaseindicatewhichonesbelow:

Open Daylight

OpenStack

OPNFV

Open Connectivity Foundation (OIC)

AllSeen

Eclipse Foundation


0.0%

5.0%

10.0%

15.0%

20.0%

25.0%

30.0%

35.0%

Ope

n D

aylig

ht

Ope

nSta

ck

OP

NF

V

Ope

n C

onne

ctiv

ity

Fou

ndat

ion

(OIC

)

AllS

een

Ecl

ipse

F

ound

atio

n

N/A

Oth

er (

plea

se

spec

ify)

If your company is participating in Open Source associations that are relevant to Telecommunications or IOT, please

indicate which ones below:


41%

37%

19%

3%

How would you characterize your participation in these organizations?

We actively make contributions/pull requests to the code base.We are monitoring the progress of the code base.Our participation is more strategic than operational.We do not participate at all.


Inyouropinion,whatareyourcompany'sgoalswithintheseorganizations?Checkallthatapply:

• Accelerate time to market for products/services

• Facilitate interoperability with other products/services

• Actively participate in the development of the code base

• Developer enablement

• Monitor technology advancement

• None

• Other (please specify)


0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

Acc

eler

ate

time

to m

arke

t for

pr

oduc

ts/s

ervi

ces

Fac

ilita

te

inte

rope

rabi

lity

with

oth

er

prod

ucts

/ser

vic…

Act

ivel

y pa

rtici

pate

in th

e de

velo

pmen

t of

the

code

bas

e

Dev

elop

er

enab

lem

ent

Mon

itor

tech

nolo

gy

adva

ncem

ent

Non

e

Oth

er (

plea

se

spec

ify)

In your opinion, what are your company's goals within these organizations? Check all that apply:

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

My company participates actively in traditional standards bodies:

Standards bodies participation

Public

• W3C,IETFandETSImostoftencitedasadoptingpoliciestoaccommodateopensourcesoftware


57%

2%

29%

12%

Is your company's participation in Open Source organizations increasing, decreasing, or steady?

Increasing Decreasing Steady Don't know

Telecom & IOT Services trends

• Machine to Machine / IOT products and implementations will • rely heavily on Open Source implementations

• rely heavily on Open Standards based implementations

• rely heavily on proprietary implementations

• Next Gen Telecom / NFV network products and implementations will • rely heavily on Open Source implementations

• rely heavily on Open Standards based implementations

• rely heavily on proprietary implementations

Pleasegiveyouropiniononthefollowingstatements:

Telecom & IOT Services trends

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Mac

hine

to M

achi

ne /

IO

T p

rodu

cts

and

impl

emen

tatio

ns w

ill

rely

hea

vily

on

Ope

n S

ourc

e im

plem

enta

tions

Mac

hine

to M

achi

ne /

IO

T p

rodu

cts

and

impl

emen

tatio

ns w

ill

rely

hea

vily

on

Ope

n S

tand

ards

bas

ed

impl

emen

tatio

ns

Mac

hine

to M

achi

ne /

IO

T p

rodu

cts

and

impl

emen

tatio

ns w

ill

rely

hea

vily

on

prop

rieta

ry

impl

emen

tatio

ns

Nex

t Gen

Tel

ecom

/ N

FV

net

wor

k pr

oduc

ts

and

impl

emen

tatio

ns

will

rel

y he

avily

on

Ope

n S

ourc

e im

plem

enta

tions

Nex

t Gen

Tel

ecom

/ N

FV

net

wor

k pr

oduc

ts

and

impl

emen

tatio

ns

will

rel

y he

avily

on

Ope

n S

tand

ards

ba

sed …

Nex

t Gen

Tel

ecom

/ N

FV

net

wor

k pr

oduc

ts

and

impl

emen

tatio

ns

will

rel

y he

avily

on

prop

rieta

ry

impl

emen

tatio

ns

Please give your opinion on the following statements:

Agree

Neutral

Disagree

N/A

Telecom Services trend

Inthescopeoftelecomservicesdeployment,whatdoyouthinkwillbethedominanttrendinthenextseveralyears?

• Proprietary implementations of non standard specifications

• Proprietary implementations of open standards specifications

• Open source implementations of open standards specifications

• Open source implementations not using open standards


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Proprietary implementation of

non standard specifications

Proprietary implementations

of open standards

specifications

Open source implementations

of open standards

specifications

Open source implementations not using open

standards

In the scope of telecom services deployment, what do you think will be the dominant trend in the next several years?

Increase

Decrease

Stable

No Opinion

RAND + Open Source

36%

4%60%

Do you believe that RAND based specifications can be successfully implemented into Open Source projects?

Yes No Not sure

Complexityandincompatibilityoflicensingtermsoftencitedasthebiggesthurdle.


0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Proprietary implementation of

non standard specifications

Proprietary implementations

of open standards

specifications

Open source implementations

of open standards

specifications

Open source implementations not using open

standards

In the scope of telecom services deployment, what do you think will be the dominant trend in the next several years?

Increase

Decrease

Stable

No Opinion

Open Standards + Open Source

Agree70%

Neutral20%

Disagree10%

Open Standards play an entirely different role than Open Source


Agree80%Disagree

3%

Neutral17%

The Open Standards community would benefit from a closer relationship to the Open Source community

• Earlyopensourceimplementationsofstandardscanprovidefeedbacktoimprovethestandard• Opensourceimplementationshelpwithdisseminationandproliferationofthestandard

Agree77%

Disagree19%

Neutral4%

The Open Source community would benefit from a closer relationship to the Open Standards community.


• OpenStandardscanhelpopensourcecommunitieswithoverallarchitectureandsystemdesignconsiderations,quality,interoperabilityandroadmap.

Question for Operators


0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

WedeployOpen

Sourceso

ftwarein

ourn

etworks

Ournetworkis

hostedinanOpen

Sourceen

abled

Clou

d

OpenSource

softwarew

illplayan

increasin

gly

impo

rtantroleinour

procurem

ent…

OpenSource

representsan

op

portun

ityto

significantlydecrease

operatingcosts

OpenSource

softwarecreatesthe

potentialforrisks

andweavoidusingit

inmissioncritical…

Werelyonou

rvend

orstomitigate

anyrisk

sassociated

with

OpenSource

codeand

wedo

not…

OpenSource

softwarea

doptionis

awork-in-progress

andweallowitinour

netw

orkw

ithcaution

Wedo

notuseOpen

Sourceinour

prod

ucts

Agree Neutral Disagree

Pleasegiveyouropiniononwhichstatementsmostaccuratelyreflectyourunderstandingofyourcompany'sapproachtodeployingOpenSourcesoftware

Open ended questions

What are the inhibitors to adoption of Open Source implementations?• Issues surrounding licensing (esp. GPL)• Industry understanding of Open Source licensing• Competitive issues and fragmentation• Security• Quality and robustness• Maintenance and support

OMA’s Steps• OMA has taken some specific steps to make its specifications easier for Developers

to consume.• Developer Focused Specifications and Tools

• LwM2M device management protocol for constrained devices (esp. IoT)• Developer Toolkit is available on GitHub

https://github.com/OpenMobileAlliance/OMA_LwM2M_for_Developers/wiki• GotAPI a secure framework for smartphone web apps to access external devices and internal

apps through Web-standard technologies supported by major Web browsers and smartphone platforms

• NTT DOCOMO provides Open Source Plug-ins with device WebAPIs available at https://github.com/DeviceConnect

• Licensing• OMA produces technical specifications that may contain RAND IPR.• OMA also produces supporting documents that are designed to make implementations (code)

easier to produce. These documents contain .dtd, .xsd, .xml.• OMA has agreed to license the supporting documents under a BSD-3 license. The license does

include a pointer to OMA IPR declarations.• The goal is to make supporting documents easier to distribute and hopefully more valuable to

developers.

OMA’s Steps

•We would love to hear from you!•Want to respond to the survey and share your opinions?• See https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/OSSurveyR2

Technology

Summit 16: Bridging Open Source & Open Standards - Oma Survey Results