Moving towards interoperability for IoT

The is a LOT of hype around the Internet of Things (IoT). Lots of vendors selling proprietary solutions that have very little to do with the Internet of Things but everything to do with locking customers into a single solution. If we are going to have a truly open Internet of Things, the solutions will need to be interoperable.

The MQTT Interop Test Day was one of the first events that has demonstrated interoperability between different proprietary and open IoT solutions. On March 17, 15 different organization and products spent 1 day testing their MQTT solutions with each other.Participating were large established software companies like IBM, Software AG,  RedHat JBoss,; smaller software companies like  2lemetry, Xively, ClearBlade, Litmus Automation, HiveMQ; hardware companies like Eurotech and Sierra Wireless and open source projects like Eclipse Kura, Eclipse Paho, NodeRed and others. it was amazing to see MQTT clients and servers that have never been tested together would simple work. It wasn’t true all the time but it certainly showed that MQTT is a specification that will enable interoperability between solutions.

A complete report is now available. The feedback from the participants was very positive so we are going to do it again in the Fall 2014, just in time for the OASIS TC to finalize the first MQTT open specification.

We are definitely moving towards an open IoT!

3 thoughts on “Moving towards interoperability for IoT

  1. Reblogged this on Manual Assembly and commented:
    Great to see that things are progressing so well with MQTT!
    To fully ensure an open IoT, it’s also important to manage the creation of it using open technologies … like OSLC 🙂

      1. Hi Mike – I think I did expand a bit on my related blog post (linked in the first comment, but here again:

        Roughly, the idea is that while MQTT gives you openness at runtime, OSLC facilitates openness at development time. And, as we’ve seen with the Internet (of Computers) openness in both areas is important.
        Unlike developer tools for software, however, it is much less likely that mechanical engineers, for example will create open source tools for mechanical design, modeling, simulation, etc. For physical product delivery, it looks like the openness will be less in the software and more in the integration of it.

        Another interesting area of possibility, which I didn’t touch on in my post, is the opportunity to leverage Linked Data (which is the foundation of OSLC) for certain IoT scenarios. My thoughts in this area, however, are much less mature … more like a “twinkle in my eye”. 🙂

        I hope this is helpful … what do you think?
        Does the connection seem reasonable?


Comments are closed.