Kaivan, I agree that IPv6 can make these Internet-connected devices "more pervasive," simply because it has so much more address space. But a problem might be that people will misconstrue that comment.
You don't HAVE to use IPv6 to achieve most of these capabilities. And the security measures available in IPv6 are also available in IPv4. The very same security protocols.
So as far as I'm concerned, people should not go off assuming that this IoT was practically impossible until now.
One simple technique, which has worked for decades, is that previously isolated control system networks are connected to the Internet via a gateway device. The gateway device is easily capable of accepting messages from the Internet at an interface with an IP address, and then translating that address into the scheme used by the previously isolated control system net. And vice versa, for messages originating from the control system net.
With that technique, as well as more standardized techniques such as NAPT, you can greatly expand the usefulness of even the 32-bit IPv4 address space.
It' true that refrigerators and toasters have not typically been connected to the Internet in the past, so perhaps the average joe didn't know this could be done. However EET readers should not be bowled over by any of this.
You are absolutely right that all of this can be done today from remote comand and control basis, and IPv6 will make it more pervasive. This said, there are a ton of services being worked on that leverages these capabilities today, that VCs weren't spending money on before, and now they are. IPv6 along with a set of security standards, maybe the tipping point that leverages most of what is there today, and come up with a whole new set of services.
all the best,
Hello @mac-droz and iniewski,
Hope all is well. @mac_droz has a great point about passive houses with the right insulation, as indeed heating and cooling are the largest expense for most home, and account for over 50% of the energy use in a typical U.S. home. You don’t need a “smart home” to keep cost down on your heating, cooling or lighting for that matter. There are a couple of cases, that a “connected” home with visibility into their appliance usage can help the grid, hence the concept of energy savings. During the peak hour for cooling or heating, e.g. 2-5 pm mid July in Austin, Texas, when the air conditioner is blasting non-stop, and the grid is experience a peak capacity….at the margins, the cost of producing electricity is a lot more expensive for the utility companies, than what they are selling the electricity to you. If they can track your appliances usage and make sure that during these peak hours you are not also as an example running your washing machine, and incentivize you to run it late at nights, then it’s a win-win for everyone, and cost of energy consumption can be reduced by a reasonable amount. This can only happen when the energy usage can be tracked at a major appliance level at the time of usage, as oppose to aggregate at the meter.
Most other services related to a “smart home” are convenience based, for remote tracking and monitoring and command and control….all of this can be done today, with or without the IoT tag on it… the only thing that makes all of this happen is IPv6, so more unique addresses for more uniquely identifiable devices on the internet.
I am working on a paper on the role of sensor fusion in IoT that may be suitable for your cmoset. Please send me an email and we can discuss (firstname.lastname@example.org).
All the best,
I agree @Bert...IoT is just a new buzzword, along the lines of many other ones (like cloud computing which was done years earlier without using the term)...marketing news buzzwords though, otherwise we would be lacking any exciting topics to talk about ;-)
Okay, another "excuse" to utter my mantra: the IoT is nothing more than "more of the same." Like everything else touted as being something brand new, yes, even this "cloud" business, in reality it is an evolution of what just about everyone is already familar with.
The Internet, to get down to the fundamentals, has ALWAYS been about "things." Internet addresses have ALWAYS been the address of an interface to a "thing." Not to a person. To a computer, to a peripheral device such as a printer, to a sensor, to a router, to a server at home or at work or in "the cloud." All things. Even your e-mail "address" becomes translated into the actual IP address of a "thing."
It's only cost and available Internet bandwidth that has kept things more or less under control. But already, you can contact your home PVR over the Internet, you can contact your car over 3G (and get remote diagnostics), easy enough to think of controlling your home heating system remotely over the Internet, and surely everyone knows that your home heating systems are also auto-adjusting (for too many decades to bother mentioning).
Remote and automated factory controls have been available for many years. Remote as well as automated control systems for cars, airplanes, ships, public transportation systems such as Metro, airport ground transportation systems, you name it, have also been with us for a whole lot of time now. Connecting each of these to the Internet, assuming they aren't already connected (many are!), is not a huge leap, is it?
So, if you want to make a few more of your own personal devices ALSO available over the Internet, surely this shouldn't be seen as ground-breaking innovation?
Good point @mac_droz, the benefits of smart homes were never clear to me...and exactly to your point: I have moved to a brand new house from 15-year old house. The old house was properly build with extra wall insulation. The new house was build to some green standards, have high tech windows, efficient lighting etc. And guess what, walls are thin and my heating being is larger although the new house is less than half the size of the old ones. I can install as much electronics as I want the heat is escaping thru the walls and holes in all windows and doors. I guess I ended up getting a stupid house ;-)...Kris
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.