Extending the Devices Profile for Web Services Standard Using a REST Proxy

Han, Son N.; Park, Soochang; Lee, Gyu Myoung; Crespi, Noël

doi:10.1109/mic.2014.44

Cited by 19 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A custom Broker that support both CoAP and MQTT, bridging the two protocols, is presented in [27]. Researchers have also tried to bridge DPWS with RESTful architectures [28] and CoAP in specific [29]. A direct comparison of DPWS, CoAP and MQTT is missing altogether from the literature, to the best of our knowledge.…”

Section: Comparison and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which IoT Protocol? Comparing Standardized Approaches over a Common M2M Application

Fysarakis

Askoxylakis

Soultatos

et al. 2016

2016 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Computing devices already permeate working and living environments, while researchers and engineers aim to exploit the potential of pervasive systems in order to introduce new types of services and address inveterate and emerging problems. This process will lead us eventually to the era of urban computing and the Internet of Things (IoT). However, the longpromised improvements require overcoming some significant obstacles introduced by these technological advancements. One such obstacle is the lack of interoperable solutions, to facilitate the use, monitoring and management of the plethora of devices and their services. While seamless machine-to-machine (M2M) and human-to-machine (H2M) interactions are a necessity for secure and truly ubiquitous computing, the current status quo is that of a segregated and incompatible assortment of devices. The resource-constraints of the platforms integrated into smart environments, and their heterogeneity in hardware, network and overlaying technologies, only exacerbate these interoperability issues. Motivated by the above, this paper identifies three promising, standardized protocols, each following a different approach in addressing the above concerns. We evaluate the selected protocols in the context of designing and implementing an application requiring various M2M interactions, namely a policy-based access control framework for IoT devices. Thus, three variants of the application are developed, considering each protocol's intrinsic characteristics and features. Finally, the developed applications are evaluated on a common testbed of embedded devices, allowing us to extract useful conclusions concerning the protocols' performance, their intricacies and their applicability in similar applications.

show abstract

Section: Comparison and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Which IoT Protocol? Comparing Standardized Approaches over a Common M2M Application

Fysarakis

Askoxylakis

Soultatos

et al. 2016

2016 IEEE Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…IP stacks. These IP smart objects will be the cornerstones of the next IoT, full-IP IoT, and could eliminate the need for protocol translation gateway such as in [14]. Protocol gateways are complex to design, manage, and deploy; their network fragmentation leads to non-efficient networks because of the inconsis- as encoding and compression [18], the integration with IPv6 infrastructure and 6LoWPAN [19,20], the scalability of service deployment [21], and the first security implementation has been included in the latest release of DPWS stacks.…”

Section: Internet Protocol For Smart Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Service composition for IP smart object using realtime Web protocols: Concept and research challenges

Han

Khan

Lee

et al. 2016

Computer Standards & Interfaces

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Besides, DPWSim has been thus far used in several IoT studies such as the semantic building automation system [23], social device networking [27], and REST proxy for DPWS [22]. DPWSim is hosted by WoO project and its source code is maintained on a GitHub repository (http://github.com/sonhan/dpwsim.)…”

Section: E Graphical User Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of the important issues in IoT, the integration of DPWS into IPv6 infrastructure and 6LoWPAN, has been also well investigated in many studies such as [20] and [21]. Han et al propose an extension of DPWS standard by using a REST proxy to provide RESTful Web APIs to developers [22]. The latest version of WS4D-JMEDS offers the use of private keys to encrypt SOAP messages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

DPWSim: A Devices Profile for Web Services (DPWS) Simulator

Han

Lee

Crespi

et al. 2015

IEEE Internet Things J.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-The Devices Profile for Web Services (DPWS) standard enables the use of Web services for resource-constrained devices, main components of the Internet of Things (IoT). DPWS can power the next generation of IoT applications connecting millions of networked devices and services on the Web. This article presents a simulator, called DPWSim, to support the use of this technology. DPWSim featuring secure messaging, dynamic discovery, service description, service invocation, and publishsubscribe eventing can be used to prototype, develop, and test products in terms of DPWS communication protocols. It can also support the collaboration between manufacturers, developers, and designers during the new product development process.

show abstract

Extending the Devices Profile for Web Services Standard Using a REST Proxy

Cited by 19 publications

References 8 publications

Which IoT Protocol? Comparing Standardized Approaches over a Common M2M Application

Which IoT Protocol? Comparing Standardized Approaches over a Common M2M Application

Service composition for IP smart object using realtime Web protocols: Concept and research challenges

DPWSim: A Devices Profile for Web Services (DPWS) Simulator

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About