I'd like to suggest that we underline
the requirements (if accepted) that BACnet/IT support a device hierarchy (at a single IP address) and better self-description by BACnet devices and systems of devices.
These are implicitly present now in some of the leading-edge BACnet work:
- BACnet/WS supports a hierarchy of devices (at one address)
- You can drill down in BACnet/WS and learn/discover all the devices and all their data (doable with some effort now in BACnet/WS, better in BACnet/XML and DR-035-11 RESTful WS extensions)
- A stated use-case in the introduction of BACnet/XML says "An export format for tools and workstations to export or publish their knowledge of the arrangement and configuration of a device or a complete system of devices and networks."
So I don't think I'm breaking new ground, but think that it would be helpful to call attention to these requirements, as they provide impetus for users to move from BACnet today to BACnet/IT ("news you can use"). Ideal claims in this area would be
- "Cuts through the Gordian Knot of BBMD/Virtual Router/Multiport complexity/misunderstandings/issues with a simple IT-friendly solution"
- "Reduces integrator configuration time (and errors) by automating the BACnet device configuration process"