Need a hand with tech consulting? I can help!
Learn more about how we can work via black.af .

Thoughts about ZOCP, Wintermute, and the IOT

ZeroMQ and IoT? I think yes.

:pencil: by Jacky Alciné Jacky Alciné :book: an wintermute post :bookmark: zeromq , iot , wintermute :clock7: written :eyeglasses: about 3 minutes, 624 words :link: Comments - 0 Mention(s) - Permalink

I’m halfway through a video about ZOCP, a nifty protocol layer that allows networked distributed programming to just work from FOSDEM this year presented by Arnuad Loonstra. I noticed it from the ZeroMQ development mailing list a few weeks ago and I had it queued to watch. I’m actually really blown away at how easily this stuff seems to work. There’s a scene about 3 minutes in where the presenter shows how literally from the terminal, in less than 10 lines of code, a new ‘node’ appears to the ZOCP network. Can you say bananas? Something like this is super interesting largely because from the outside, the IoT is a hot mess. That’s putting it lightly. Portability is a pain if you don’t abstract critical aspects of the actual “chatter” of your system away from the underlying “work”1. That can get harder to do depending on what’s communicating with that (Arduino to laptop, Raspberry Pi to Spark, etc). Going back to the talk, the structure of ZOCP looks a bit like this:

Plumbing of ZOCP.

I have to admit, looking at this got me a bit confused. Sure, I understood the capability exchange aspect of things (hey buddy, I can do “X”, “Y” and “Z”!) but the signals and streams layers went over my head. Following through with the video, signals were explained as “IDs with [associated] data”. That clicked when I remember how the counter’s toggle was enabled and disabled, other subscribers were able to update their values. Cool. Streams were literally a wrapper on top of conventional (hah) streams served via TCP. The presenter goes on to explain how streams worked in ZOCP and the likes.

Arnuad’s very direct and blunt on the capabilities of ZOCP. It’s meant really to just make the data that’s available from one particular application available to another. There was a mention of multicast support which allowed for communicating over multiple networks (cloud-systems anyone?) but for a home network, this is dope. This revealed a bigger problem with the Internet of Things, though. As far as I know (or that’s publicly available), we haven’t solidified a specification on how entities should be represented over a network let alone to a machine. Everyone’s (I’m GLARING at you, Belkin)2 working on their own proprietary “plug-n-play” solutions for things, but that makes it hard for not only adoption, but interoperability with other devices. This is what I’m aiming to achieve with Wintermute, to be honest, as a side goal; allowing entities to build formalized representations of themselves and have people work on them. You’d think that it’d be as simple as plugging in your devices, firing up your primary “authoritative” machines and then being able to watch a map of the activity of your devices. Think Grafana meets Segment.io’s funnel of services.

Until a more “formal” setup of having interconnected devices can be come to be, we’re going to have some time to get before the IoT becomes real. What I had in mind, though a bit expensive in implementation, was having something similar to how the Chromecast setup works but not quite. Something like WiFi Direct3 could work for the setup process, provided handshaking and the likes can go through.

  1. That’s fair to say of legacy Web applications or frameworks that dive deep into your business logic. 

  2. Eh, this is loaded. I only know of Belkin, Sonos, Western Digital and Panasonic doing this. 

  3. This looks limited to specific kinds of hardware, YAY FOR VENDOR LOCK-IN :angry: