Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

How many future flavors of BACnet?

Expand Messages
  • James F. Butler
    Dear IT-WG and XML-WG members, Our discussions within the IT-WG and parallel work being done in the XML-WG are leading us to a major decision point: How many
    Message 1 of 5 , Jan 16, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear IT-WG and XML-WG members,
       
      Our discussions within the IT-WG and parallel work being done in the XML-WG are leading us to a major decision point: How many major flavors of BACnet do we want to have going forward?
       
      1.  We currently have BACnet v1 (and the corresponding SOAP-based web services interface to other systems).  This will need to be maintained indefinitely.
       
      2.  The IT-WG has been discussing a possible new version of BACnet based on the TCP/IP suite of standards that largely preserves the existing BACnet object model.  The structure and semantics of the existing application layer messages could be preserved, as well as the current ASN.1-based encoding of the messages.
       
      3.  Within the XML-WG, Dave Robin has been working on a major document (DR-035-n) that describes a possible new web services standard based on REST primitives that would provide application services that are similar in functionality to many existing BACnet services.  This was originally intended to enhance or replace the existing SOAP-based web services interface in BACnet, but with further development it could become a new version of BACnet based on web services and IETF standards (HTTP/TCP/IP etc.).
       
      Starting Albuquerque, the XML-WG has had some good, general discussions about the question of the number of future flavors of BACnet.  In order for the BACnet committee to make an informed decision about this, I believe that we need to come up with a structured evaluation process for the various options.  And we should not ignore the potential marketing consequences of our decision.
       
      I would like to get started in developing this evaluation process before we meet in Las Vegas.  For that purpose, I will organize a teleconference this Wednesday, January 19, from 12:30 until 2:00 p.m. EST.  If you would like to participate, please send me an e-mail by the close of business on Tuesday.
       
      Thanks,
       
      - Jim Butler
       
    • Charles Frankston
      ... From: James F. Butler Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 22:01 To: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com Cc:
      Message 2 of 5 , Jan 17, 2011
      • 0 Attachment



        From: James F. Butler <jimbutler@...>
        Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 22:01
        To: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com <bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com>
        Cc: BACnet-XML-WG@yahoogroups.com <BACnet-XML-WG@yahoogroups.com>
        Subject: [bacnet-it-wg] How many future flavors of BACnet?

         

        Dear IT-WG and XML-WG members,
         
        Our discussions within the IT-WG and parallel work being done in the XML-WG are leading us to a major decision point: How many major flavors of BACnet do we want to have going forward?
         
        1.  We currently have BACnet v1 (and the corresponding SOAP-based web services interface to other systems).  This will need to be maintained indefinitely.
         
        2.  The IT-WG has been discussing a possible new version of BACnet based on the TCP/IP suite of standards that largely preserves the existing BACnet object model.  The structure and semantics of the existing application layer messages could be preserved, as well as the current ASN.1-based encoding of the messages.
         
        3.  Within the XML-WG, Dave Robin has been working on a major document (DR-035-n) that describes a possible new web services standard based on REST primitives that would provide application services that are similar in functionality to many existing BACnet services.  This was originally intended to enhance or replace the existing SOAP-based web services interface in BACnet, but with further development it could become a new version of BACnet based on web services and IETF standards (HTTP/TCP/IP etc.).
         
        Starting Albuquerque, the XML-WG has had some good, general discussions about the question of the number of future flavors of BACnet.  In order for the BACnet committee to make an informed decision about this, I believe that we need to come up with a structured evaluation process for the various options.  And we should not ignore the potential marketing consequences of our decision.
         
        I would like to get started in developing this evaluation process before we meet in Las Vegas.  For that purpose, I will organize a teleconference this Wednesday, January 19, from 12:30 until 2:00 p.m. EST.  If you would like to participate, please send me an e-mail by the close of business on Tuesday.
         
        Thanks,
         
        - Jim Butler
         
      • Swan, Bill
        Jim, I am interested. Bill Swan Buildings Standards Initiatives Leader Honeywell Alerton | Trend Controls Dealer Business 6670 185th Ave NE Redmond, WA 98052
        Message 3 of 5 , Jan 17, 2011
        • 0 Attachment

          Jim,

           

          I am interested.

           

          Bill Swan

          Buildings Standards Initiatives Leader

          Honeywell

          Alerton | Trend Controls Dealer Business

          6670 185th Ave NE

          Redmond, WA 98052 U.S.A.

          phone +1 (425) 897-3981

          fax +1 (425) 869-8445

          email: bill.swan@...

          blog:  bacnetbill.blogspot.com


          From: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Charles Frankston
          Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 8:36 AM
          To: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com
          Cc: BACnet-XML-WG@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: RE: [bacnet-it-wg] How many future flavors of BACnet?

           

           

           


          From: James F. Butler <jimbutler@...>
          Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 22:01
          To: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com <bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com>
          Cc: BACnet-XML-WG@yahoogroups.com <BACnet-XML-WG@yahoogroups.com>
          Subject: [bacnet-it-wg] How many future flavors of BACnet?

           

          Dear IT-WG and XML-WG members,

           

          Our discussions within the IT-WG and parallel work being done in the XML-WG are leading us to a major decision point: How many major flavors of BACnet do we want to have going forward?

           

          1.  We currently have BACnet v1 (and the corresponding SOAP-based web services interface to other systems).  This will need to be maintained indefinitely.

           

          2.  The IT-WG has been discussing a possible new version of BACnet based on the TCP/IP suite of standards that largely preserves the existing BACnet object model.  The structure and semantics of the existing application layer messages could be preserved, as well as the current ASN.1-based encoding of the messages.

           

          3.  Within the XML-WG, Dave Robin has been working on a major document (DR-035-n) that describes a possible new web services standard based on REST primitives that would provide application services that are similar in functionality to many existing BACnet services.  This was originally intended to enhance or replace the existing SOAP-based web services interface in BACnet, but with further development it could become a new version of BACnet based on web services and IETF standards (HTTP/TCP/IP etc.).

           

          Starting Albuquerque , the XML-WG has had some good, general discussions about the question of the number of future flavors of BACnet.  In order for the BACnet committee to make an informed decision about this, I believe that we need to come up with a structured evaluation process for the various options.  And we should not ignore the potential marketing consequences of our decision.

           

          I would like to get started in developing this evaluation process before we meet in Las Vegas .  For that purpose, I will organize a teleconference this Wednesday, January 19, from 12:30 until 2:00 p.m. EST.  If you would like to participate, please send me an e-mail by the close of business on Tuesday.

           

          Thanks,

           

          - Jim Butler

           

        • Carl Neilson
          Jim, Count me in. Carl ________________________________ From: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of James F. Butler
          Message 4 of 5 , Jan 17, 2011
          • 0 Attachment
             
            Jim,
             
            Count me in.
             
            Carl


            From: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of James F. Butler
            Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 7:01 PM
            To: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com
            Cc: BACnet-XML-WG@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [bacnet-it-wg] How many future flavors of BACnet?

             

            Dear IT-WG and XML-WG members,
             
            Our discussions within the IT-WG and parallel work being done in the XML-WG are leading us to a major decision point: How many major flavors of BACnet do we want to have going forward?
             
            1.  We currently have BACnet v1 (and the corresponding SOAP-based web services interface to other systems).  This will need to be maintained indefinitely.
             
            2.  The IT-WG has been discussing a possible new version of BACnet based on the TCP/IP suite of standards that largely preserves the existing BACnet object model.  The structure and semantics of the existing application layer messages could be preserved, as well as the current ASN.1-based encoding of the messages.
             
            3.  Within the XML-WG, Dave Robin has been working on a major document (DR-035-n) that describes a possible new web services standard based on REST primitives that would provide application services that are similar in functionality to many existing BACnet services.  This was originally intended to enhance or replace the existing SOAP-based web services interface in BACnet, but with further development it could become a new version of BACnet based on web services and IETF standards (HTTP/TCP/IP etc.).
             
            Starting Albuquerque, the XML-WG has had some good, general discussions about the question of the number of future flavors of BACnet.  In order for the BACnet committee to make an informed decision about this, I believe that we need to come up with a structured evaluation process for the various options.  And we should not ignore the potential marketing consequences of our decision.
             
            I would like to get started in developing this evaluation process before we meet in Las Vegas.  For that purpose, I will organize a teleconference this Wednesday, January 19, from 12:30 until 2:00 p.m. EST.  If you would like to participate, please send me an e-mail by the close of business on Tuesday.
             
            Thanks,
             
            - Jim Butler
             

          • john.lundstedt@buildings.schneider-electr
            Hi Jim, I am interested in joining. John Lundstedt (Schneider Electric) From: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
            Message 5 of 5 , Jan 17, 2011
            • 0 Attachment

              Hi Jim,

               

              I am interested in joining.

               

              John Lundstedt  (Schneider Electric)

               

               

              From: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com [mailto:bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of James F. Butler
              Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 10:01 PM
              To: bacnet-it-wg@yahoogroups.com
              Cc: BACnet-XML-WG@yahoogroups.com
              Subject: [bacnet-it-wg] How many future flavors of BACnet?

               

               

              Dear IT-WG and XML-WG members,

               

              Our discussions within the IT-WG and parallel work being done in the XML-WG are leading us to a major decision point: How many major flavors of BACnet do we want to have going forward?

               

              1.  We currently have BACnet v1 (and the corresponding SOAP-based web services interface to other systems).  This will need to be maintained indefinitely.

               

              2.  The IT-WG has been discussing a possible new version of BACnet based on the TCP/IP suite of standards that largely preserves the existing BACnet object model.  The structure and semantics of the existing application layer messages could be preserved, as well as the current ASN.1-based encoding of the messages.

               

              3.  Within the XML-WG, Dave Robin has been working on a major document (DR-035-n) that describes a possible new web services standard based on REST primitives that would provide application services that are similar in functionality to many existing BACnet services.  This was originally intended to enhance or replace the existing SOAP-based web services interface in BACnet, but with further development it could become a new version of BACnet based on web services and IETF standards (HTTP/TCP/IP etc.).

               

              Starting Albuquerque, the XML-WG has had some good, general discussions about the question of the number of future flavors of BACnet.  In order for the BACnet committee to make an informed decision about this, I believe that we need to come up with a structured evaluation process for the various options.  And we should not ignore the potential marketing consequences of our decision.

               

              I would like to get started in developing this evaluation process before we meet in Las Vegas.  For that purpose, I will organize a teleconference this Wednesday, January 19, from 12:30 until 2:00 p.m. EST.  If you would like to participate, please send me an e-mail by the close of business on Tuesday.

               

              Thanks,

               

              - Jim Butler

               


              ______________________________________________________________________
              This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
              For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email
              ______________________________________________________________________
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.