Computing Reviews
Today's Issue Hot Topics Search Browse Recommended My Account Log In
Review Help
Search
A resource oriented integration architecture for the Internet of Things
Dar K., Taherkordi A., Baraki H., Eliassen F., Geihs K. Pervasive and Mobile Computing20 145-159,2015.Type:Article
Date Reviewed: Mar 22 2016

A concrete component architecture for integrating small Internet of Things (IoT) devices into larger business processes is central in this easy-to-follow and comprehensive paper. Against the backdrop of an ambient assisted living system supporting people in constant need of medical supervision (for example, temperature, blood pressure, heart rate), the authors develop and performance test a sound and novel architecture for distributed process execution.

The architecture uses several common and tried integration patterns--message brokers for asynchronous, event-based communications; proxies for decoupling logical from physical service providers; service registries; manager applications for performing certain special tasks, like replacing failed IoT devices; and separation of rules execution from process enactment--all within the paradigm of RESTful services.

Key differentiating aspects of the proposal are (1) a set-top box (STB) not only for executing the processes, but also for power-efficient communication with local (IoT) sensor devices; (2) execution of monitoring processes directly on a smartphone (plus Bluetooth communications with wearable sensors) for a use case where patients leave their stationary home with fixed sensors; and (3) a programming framework for allowing business users to develop process applications. The last claim has not been validated, though.

A first set of performance tests is quite revealing. For instance, the use of IoT-optimized communication protocols (like the constrained application protocol) instead of hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) between sensors and an STB is mandatory to achieve latencies below 500 ms. Additionally, the introduction of a message broker merely adds 12 ms latency, and the use of software proxies for replacing failed sensors is 20 times faster than re-instantiation with a new sensor (80 ms versus 1,600 ms).

Summing up: this is a must-read for every architect and process specialist working in the domain where distributed process execution and IoT aspects meet.

Reviewer:  Christoph F. Strnadl Review #: CR144246 (1606-0407)
Bookmark and Share
  Editor Recommended
Featured Reviewer
 
 
Distributed Systems (C.2.4 )
 
 
Centralization/ Decentralization (K.6.4 ... )
 
 
Distributed Systems (H.3.4 ... )
 
 
Patterns (D.2.11 ... )
 
 
Process Control (J.7 ... )
 
 
Web-Based Services (H.3.5 ... )
 
  more  
Would you recommend this review?
yes
no
Other reviews under "Distributed Systems": Date
The evolution of a distributed processing network
Franz L., Sen A., Rakes T. Information and Management 7(5): 263-272, 1984. Type: Article
Jul 1 1985
A geographically distributed multi-microprocessor system
Angioletti W., D’Hondt T., Tiberghien J.  Concurrent languages in distributed systems: hardware supported implementation (, Bristol, UK,871985. Type: Proceedings
Oct 1 1985
A fault tolerant LAN with integrated storage, as part of a distributed computing system
Boogaard H., Bruins T., Vree W., Reijns G.  Concurrent languages in distributed systems: hardware supported implementation (, Bristol, UK,1001985. Type: Proceedings
Aug 1 1985
more...

E-Mail This Printer-Friendly
Send Your Comments
Contact Us
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.   Copyright 1999-2024 ThinkLoud®
Terms of Use
| Privacy Policy