+ Reference Architecture for the Internet of Things

+ IoT – need for a reference architecture (roadmap) Internet of Content Web 1.0 Web-sites Search HTML Internet of Services Web 2.0 eCommerce / eServices REST Internet of People Social Media Mobile enablement HTML 5 Internet of Things “Things” semantically represented in the internet Active & Passive Device to device communication No single definition for Internet of Things but common features: “Things” have semantic representation in the Internet “Things” can be acted upon in a structured manner (e.g., status, capabilities, location, measurements) or can report in structured data or can communicate directly with other “Things” "Things” may be active (e.g., Zigbee sensor) or passive (e.g. RFID tag) Different “Things” may use multiple protocols to communicate with each other and the internet The Internet of Things needs a Reference Architecture – NB: this ppt is not meant to be definitive but a point of view on a very interesting domain

+ “Things” & Server Side Architecture The Internet of Things is an umbrella term that includes multiple different categories: Wireless Sensor Networks Internet-connected wearables Low power embedded systems RFID enabled tracking Use of mobile phones to interact with the real world (e.g. sensing) Devices that connect via Bluetooth enabled mobile phones to the Internet Connected Homes & Connected Cars Architecture: No single architecture will suffice A modular scalable architecture with distributed capabilities is required Reference architecture provides a starting point for architects looking to enable “Things” and for new operators ambitious to monetise the internet

+ IoT Scope

+ A Reference Architecture for IoT

+ IoT Communications & Devices Devices are independent & distributed Multiple protocols Device network handoff involve multiple protocols Communications involve complex Networking and Addressing One size does not fit all

+ IoT Protocols There are many different usable protocols for communication with M2M devices for the Internet of Things Specific protocols are more appropriate for different devices (e.g. memory & power profiles) Specific protocols are more appropriate for different communication needs (e.g. State Transfer Model & Event Based Model) The most usable protocols are: HTTP/HTTPS & WebSockets (and RESTful approaches on those) MQTT 3.1 / MQTT -SN Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) XMPP

+ MQTT MQTT is a publish/subscribe messaging protocol designed for lightweight M2M communications. It was originally developed by IBM and is now an open standard. MQTT has a client/server model, where every sensor is a client and connects to a server, known as a broker, over TCP. MQTT is message oriented. Every message is a discrete chunk of data, opaque to the broker. Every message is published to an address, known as a topic. Clients may subscribe to multiple topics. Every client subscribed to a topic receives every message published to the topic.

+ MQTT Example For example, imagine a simple network with three clients and a central broker. All three clients open TCP connections with the broker. Clients B and C subscribe to the topic temperature At a later time, Client A publishes a value of 22.5 for topic temperature. The broker forwards the message to all subscribed clients. The publisher subscriber model allows MQTT clients to communicate one-to-one, one-to-many and many-to-one.

+ MQTT-SN Even though MQTT is designed to be lightweight, it has two drawbacks for very constrained devices. Every MQTT client must support TCP and will typically hold a connection open to the broker at all times. For some environments where packet loss is high or computing resources are scarce, this is a problem. MQTT topic names are often long strings which make them impractical for Both of these shortcomings are addressed by the MQTT-SN protocol, which defines a UDP mapping of MQTT and adds broker support for indexing topic names.

+ IoT Devices Devices: Independent, Distributed, Independently & Directly Connected Purchased through different channels Self-made with Arduino or equivalent Different versions

+ Integration: Distributed Service Layer An IoT reference architecture is predicated on a distributed service layer capable of integrating IoT BSS with Devices The DSL can replace more traditional mobile network OSS by providing transactional idempotent processes for massively distributed “Things” The DSL itself would need to be massively distributed with different capabilities provided by multiple parties For example the GSMA’s two network elements for secure over the air installation of mobile operator credentials into a SIM: Subscription Manager Data Preparation (SM-DP) & Subscription Manager Secure Routing (SM-SR) Another example would be Zigbee’s own Gateway which provides a local service layer / service bus to Zigbee devices DSL ownership will be either native or procured by the BSS provider as DSL provides standardised capabilities for ESB & Messaging capabilities and all of the Protocol support, data transformation, policy enforcement, messaging & persistence necessary to support that service providers’s offerings A service providers will require a DSL connecting to their customer focused BSS domain

+ BSS for IoT The BSS of IoT needs to be customer / family / business focused with emphasis on Average Revenue per Device (ARPD). IoT ARPD or the sum IoT ARPU is considerably lower than traditional mobile ARPU. The cost is also front-loaded into the device rather than the contract. For these reasons the BSS of IoT must therefore focusing on a low cost device enablement operating model Key BSS capabilities: Fulfilment Order decomposition, orchestration & fallout Reliable messaging, self-care operations, up-sell / cross-sell, product mgmt Assurance: Customer relationship mgmt, identity mgmt, operations QoS, Service Delivery, Trouble Ticketing Billing: Billing per device or bulk service offering for larger customers Remediated billing across different networks, for example M2M (handoff / backhaul / roaming)

+ IoT Channels: Omni-Channel Key Use Cases Web / Portal for Self-Care / Account Mgmt Use Cases Self-care use cases for device & hierarchy mgmt Integration to BSS, Identity Mgmt & Device Mgmt Role for Distributed Service Layer Device driven authentication / device authorisation challenge Support both API Gateway & HTML 5 for blended app support Mobile Apps Apps mainly developed by vendor / internal API layer enables operator service features Model more suited to blend rather than native apps Contact Centre / IVR Voice recognition devices Limited use cases (e.g. remote listening devices) Service Enablement / API Gateway Device registration & usage is multi-channel Devices rarely have setup UI and self-installed first time connection via Bluetooth or device’s own first time wifi network to laptop or mobile App Device self-registration with Network Operator depending on eUICC partner User monetisation of installed capability (e.g. reselling wifi) requires channel for prospective customers

+ Identity & Device Management User / party identity and device identity management cascade through an IoT architecture The device identity is what allows “Things” to be semantically represented in the internet User / party identity is necessary for channels & BSS usage but can cascade to the device for lowest level authorisation User / party identity to device identity mapping can be delivered at a BSS layer or via a trusted externalised identity provider of the user’s choosing An example of M2M Identity Mgmt is the Telecommunications Industry Association functional standard for Authentication, Authorization and Accounting for Smart Device (AAA-SD TIA) An example of device management supporting M2M use cases with no human intervention for secure over the air installation of mobile operator credentials into a SIM requires two key network elements have been specified by the GSMA: Subscription Manager Data Preparation (SM-DP) Subscription Manager Secure Routing (SM-SR)

+ But Where is the OSS? There is no need for single OSS because anybody can be the device service provider The role of the Mobile Network Operator will change because the “Things” are connected to the internet rather than to a walled network OSS should become commoditised supporting different protocols on top of which a semantic service layer can be defined BSS will make use of the semantic service layer and provide aggregating functions for a complete family of devices Even though the devices will continually change the standard protocols and structured services will remain

+ Conclusion: IoT Reference Architeture Any IoT reference architecture has to scale for the increasing number of interconnected devices: Smart “Things” (e.g. Internet-connected wearables) Interconnected “Things” (e.g. Smart Home) System of “Things” (e.g. Smart City / national grid) Communication between Interconnected “Things” which aggregate to form a System of “Things” will not always necessarily communicate through the centralised service layer. Devices will standardise towards providing their own communication layer (e.g. Zigbee Gateway, SM-SR/-SD). Interconnected devices will use the most appropriate protocol (e.g. memory & power profiles) and the most appropriate communication mechanism (e.g. State Transfer Model & Event Based Model) Intelligent devices will seek to hand-off to the lowest cost network (RFID, Bluetooth, Wifi, Mobile Network) while maintaining the QoS The role of the service provider will be to provide intelligence on top of a massively distributed service layer Traditional mobile network OSS will be replaced by core capabilities on a service provider’s Distributed Service Layer