OCF Protocol Implementation for Smart Home IoT Applications: An Android SDK Development Case Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63282/3050-9262.IJAIDSML-V2I1P111Keywords:
OCF Protocol, IoT, Android SDK, Smart Home, CoAP, Device Discovery, IoT Interoperability, SDK Design, Embedded Systems, Open Connectivity FoundationAbstract
Findings show that while the interoperability guidelines offered by the Open Connectivity Foundation (OCF) protocol standard appear to offer a framework for devices that can interoperate in different spaces, it is quite clear that engineering issues raised in the implementation of the standard in commercial Android SDK development (device discovery, resource model mapping, security bootstrapping, and cross-platform compatibility) are substantial. The paper gives a detailed case study of an implementation of OCF protocol in terms of implementation of the protocol's resource discovery mechanism in a commercial thermostat smart home product, development of CoAP transport layer integration for OCF, onboarding security flows for the devices, and design of the protocol SDK API to make it accessible for third-party developers. The study clearly reveals architectural constraints faced when translating the specification OCF into Android based libraries, especially on the area of handling constrained device communication and asychronous CoAP messaging for secure credential provisioning using DTLS security layers. The new SDK design is built upon a layered architecture with a transport abstraction layer, OCF resource manager, security bootstrap handler and an application-level API wrapper. Experimental testing in an isolated smart home setup shows better interoperability between multi-vendor devices, lower onboarding time, and higher developer convenience in comparison to the baseline time and tools used by each vendor's proprietary device software development kit (SDK) implementations. Resource optimisation for caching and discovery in a multicast domain shows that the enumeration of all resources in the domain can be reduced without compromising protocol fidelity, substantially. The experience gained in the deployment of production SDK for the Android gives rise to a set of general design principles for OCF-compliant development of Android SDK, such as: light weight CoAP Session reuse, stateless resource mapping techniques, and automated onboarding in a secure manner. The results provide the IoT standards engineering community with workable best practice advice, and well contribute support to the goal of scaling OCF into practical deployment in a commercial Android smart home market.
References
[1] Papadopoulos, N., Meliones, A., Economou, D., Karras, I., & Liverezas, I. (2009, June). A connected home platform and development framework for smart home control applications. In 2009 7th IEEE International Conference on Industrial Informatics (pp. 402-409). IEEE.
[2] Li, X., Nie, L., Chen, S., Zhan, D., & Xu, X. (2015, June). An IoT service framework for smart home: Case study on HEM. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Mobile Services (pp. 438-445). IEEE.
[3] Tomanek, O., & Kencl, L. (2016, June). Security and privacy of using AllJoyn IoT framework at home and beyond. In 2016 2nd international conference on intelligent green building and smart grid (IGBSG) (pp. 1-6). IEEE.
[4] Bormann, C., Castellani, A. P., & Shelby, Z. (2012). Coap: An application protocol for billions of tiny internet nodes. IEEE Internet Computing, 16(2), 62-67.
[5] Al-Fuqaha, A., Guizani, M., Mohammadi, M., Aledhari, M., & Ayyash, M. (2015). Internet of things: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE communications surveys & tutorials, 17(4), 2347-2376.
[6] Miorandi, D., Sicari, S., De Pellegrini, F., & Chlamtac, I. (2012). Internet of things: Vision, applications and research challenges. Ad hoc networks, 10(7), 1497-1516.
[7] Kumar, M. S., & Yuvaraj, N. (2020). Building a Privacy-Aware Customer Data Foundation: A Governance-First Approach to Digital Service Systems. International Journal of Emerging Research in Engineering and Technology, 1(4), 55-68.
[8] Palattella, M. R., Accettura, N., Vilajosana, X., Watteyne, T., Grieco, L. A., Boggia, G., & Dohler, M. (2012). Standardized protocol stack for the internet of (important) things. IEEE communications surveys & tutorials, 15(3), 1389-1406.
[9] Görmüş, S., Aydın, H., & Ulutaş, G. (2018). Security for the internet of things: a survey of existing mechanisms, protocols and open research issues. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 33(4), 1247-1272.
[10] Khan, F., ur Rahman, I., Khan, M., Iqbal, N., & Alam, M. (2016, September). CoAP-based request-response interaction model for the Internet of Things. In International Conference on Future Intelligent Vehicular Technologies (pp. 146-156). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
[11] Roman, R., Zhou, J., & Lopez, J. (2013). On the features and challenges of security and privacy in distributed internet of things. Computer networks, 57(10), 2266-2279.
[12] Raza, S., Shafagh, H., Hewage, K., Hummen, R., & Voigt, T. (2013). Lithe: Lightweight secure CoAP for the internet of things. IEEE sensors journal, 13(10), 3711-3720.
[13] Kumar, J. S., & Patel, D. R. (2014). A survey on internet of things: Security and privacy issues. International Journal of Computer Applications, 90(11), 20-26.
[14] Datta, S. K., Bonnet, C., & Nikaein, N. (2014, March). An IoT gateway centric architecture to provide novel M2M services. In 2014 IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT) (pp. 514-519). IEEE.
[15] Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., & Bormann, C. (2014). The constrained application protocol (CoAP) (No. rfc7252).
[16] Vermesan, O., & Friess, P. (Eds.). (2013). Internet of things: converging technologies for smart environments and integrated ecosystems. River publishers.
[17] Hartke, K. (2015). Observing resources in the constrained application protocol (CoAP) (No. rfc7641).
[18] Chun, S. M., Kim, H. S., & Park, J. T. (2015). CoAP-based mobility management for the Internet of Things. Sensors, 15(7), 16060-16082.
[19] Marksteiner, S., Jimenez, V. J. E., Valiant, H., & Zeiner, H. (2017). An overview of wireless IoT protocol security in the smart home domain. 2017 Internet of Things Business Models, Users, and Networks, 1-8.
[20] Rizvi, S., Orr, R. J., Cox, A., Ashokkumar, P., & Rizvi, M. R. (2020). Identifying the attack surface for IoT network. Internet of Things, 9, 100162.
[21] Hassija, V., Chamola, V., Saxena, V., Jain, D., Goyal, P., & Sikdar, B. (2019). A survey on IoT security: application areas, security threats, and solution architectures. IEEE access, 7, 82721-82743.
[22] Lee, J. C., Kim, H. J., & Kim, S. H. (2017, October). Bridging OCF devices to legacy IoT devices. In 2017 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC) (pp. 616-621). IEEE.
