You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 13 Next »


Delivery:  ~ October 2018

The Delhi release is slated to provide the first system management capabilities while also implementing additional features in the security.  Delhi will continue to show improvements in performance and include tests to monitor and report on potential performance issues.  The release will also establish the certification program within the EdgeX project for both commercial instances of the full platform and drop-in "EdgeX-compliant" microservices.  Finally, this release will also start to look at EdgeX in a wider, distributed context - that is exploring EdgeX instances (or services) spread across a fog deployment.

Key release themes and planned features to be implemented will be detailed after the mid-year TSC Face-to-face meeing (~June 2018).

Release Themes and Objectives

  • Deliver system management APIs in all the microservices and provide a system management agent for orchestrating multi-service system management commands and communications to 3rd party system management tools/platforms.
  • Go/C replacement services for any remaining Java services.
    • Provide new and improved device services in Go and C.
    • Notification, Scheduler, Rules Engine replacement services.
  • Improved performance to continually lower footprint, data collection and actuation latency, lower startup time, etc. which began with the California Release and offer performance testing to validate performance targets are being met. 
  • Implementation of additional priority features for security and manageability
  • Potentially, implementation of specific services and SDKs in C to support deterministic real time use cases (see section below for more details)
  • Certification process for EdgeX-compliant microservices to enable a plug-and-play ecosystem 
    • Various levels of certification are being considered, from micro service replacement certification (validating alternate or commercial implementations of EdgeX micro services satisfy API requirements along with performance metrics and quality checks) to full EdgeX deployments (for commercial versions of EdgeX)
    • Additional certification processes may be developed around particular cross cutting features such as security.
  • Arm 32 support and native testing - with continuous integration processes extended to produce artifacts and support the native testing
  • Facilitate East/West capability
    • Micro service load balancing, failover, scale-over, ...
    • Device from EdgeX A triggers action on device on EdgeX B
  • Address data privacy concerns
    • EU laws and affirmation about data use/storage/etc.
    • HIP-A
  • Not MVP, but additional contributions sought for
    • Provide additional reference connectivity
      • Export Services (e.g. AWS/Greengrass)
      • Device Services (e.g. OPC-UA)
    • Demonstration of EdgeX in real-world POC/test bed, including through possible collaboration with the IIC

General Tasks and Notes

  • Certification Process - want to have outlined by Delhi

    • Probably will include different levels of certification (micro service, versus “box”, etc.)

  • ARM 64 support is being provided with the California release.  In this release, ARM 32 support is handled.
    • CI process that includes cross compiling for Arm 32 platform artifacts
    • Micro service Docker container images produced for Arm 32 platforms
    • Native platform testing of the micro services on Arm 32 platforms

  • Provide roadmap around technical debt/refactor (what and when)

    • Example:  Device service rewrites (ex: BLE, Bacnet); allow multiple instances of any microservice (for future load balancing and scaling efforts - today only single instances are allowed)

  • Improving EdgeX resiliency in face of issues or non-availability of some resources/services/etc.

  • Potentially, provide EdgeX User Interface(s)

Micro Service Tasks and Notes

  • Meet all performance targets
    While more requirements are needed, the overall performance targets for EdgeX are listed at the bottom of this page and include running all the core, support and application micro services in < 1GB or RAM on a 64 bit CPU, requiring less than 32GB of disk storage space, start (collectively) in under 1 minute and actuate from sensor collection to device trigger in < 1 second.

    In order to accomplish these targets, it is believed the following work must be accomplished for the Delhi release

    • Provide 100% compatible and complete Go Lang micro services for the existing Java core, support and application micro services to include core-data, core-metadata, core-command, core-consul (with seed), support-logging,  support-notifications, support-scheduler, support-rulesengine, export-client, export-distro.
    • Provide device service SDKs and example device services in languages like Go and C/C++

  • Implement security & system management API hooks

    Depending on the implementation needs of security and system management (see below), there may be a need to make changes to the existing micro service code in support of these facets.  It is likely that each micro service will implement some sort of base service to provide data and system management functionality to the system management agent.  In support of access to services based on access control list security, additional micro service change could be required.

  • Refresh (to latest releases) and improve north side connectors (like Azure IoT Hub connector)

  • Support additional backend integration(s) such as Watson, AWS/Greengrass, …

  • Support additional export feature(s)

    • Support additional formats (Ex: Haystack, OPC-UA, …)

    • Support additional endpoint types (Ex:  DDS, AMQP, …)

    • Provide enrichment services

  • How best to facilitate client command requests/actuation

  • Expose command information north bound (export of actuation information and APIs)

  • More dynamic configuration

  • Potentially, alternate message infrastructure between some or all the services

Device Services and SDK Tasks and Notes

  • Implement security & system management API hooks

    Depending on the implementation needs of security and system management, there may be a need to make changes to the SDKs and existing micro service code in support of these facets.  It is likely that each micro service will implement some sort of base service to provide data and system management functionality to the system management agent.  As device services are typically created from an SDK, the same boilerplate code for the base service needs to be added to the SDK(s).  Additional changes may be required in support of security needs (like granting access by access control list).

  • Provide new and/or updated Device Services

    Many of the original device services where created with driver stacks that are suit for purpose on all platforms, are no longer supported, are not homogeneous in their make up (i.e. having some parts Java while other elements in Python), or are using stacks that are not consider the best option for the protocol today.  The BLE and BACnet device services fall under this categorization.

    Several of the device services were created to prove, conceptually, how to connect to a device using that protocol, but it may not be a full implementation of the protocol API.  For example, the SNMP device service implements enough to drive a Patlite and a few other devices, but does not understand all of SNMP.

    Many of these devices services need to be updated, made more consistent in makeup and more complete in terms of protocol implementation.

  • Additional DS (i.e. Zigbee, OPC-UA, CANBus, …)
    EdgeX will never provide all the device services necessary to implement every use case and to connect to every type of device or sensor.  However, EdgeX would like to offer reference implementation device services for the most common of IIoT protocols.  EdgeX offers many of those today to include BACNet, Modbus, BLE, and MQTT.  But we need reference implementation device services in OPC-UA, Zigbee, Zwave, CANBus and a others as well.
  • Not MVP, but additional contributions sought for
    • Provide SDK Tool plugins to facility developers
    • The Java Device Service SDK today is operated by command line execution.  That is, in order to create a new device service, the user must edit configuration settings in a file, then go to the command line and execute an SDK operation, and then finally manually import the new generated project into the tool of choice.  In the future, for the Java SDK as well as other language versions of the SDK, it is preferred to have some sort of plugin (example: Eclipse Plugin) or UI driven tool (“wizard”) to assist developers by providing a more user-friendly facility to capture their configuration options, generate the new device service and load it into to development tool of choice.
    • The Device Service SDK today is available through GitHub.  Developers not working on the actual open source products may not be familiar with GitHub and/or may prefer not to have to use Git tools to pull down and work with the SDK.  As an alternative, we could make the SDK (and any necessary elements like libraries) available through a Web site for download.

Security Tasks and Notes

  • California release was focused on initially securing the EdgeX “gateway” and remains the priority
    • This work will be extended / augmented in this release (looking at alternative authentication, adding MQTT and other protocol reverse proxy, etc.)
  • Code signing – how to certify integrity of the system
  • The release will start to explore, potentially, securing EdgeX’s devices

  • Explore potential use of hyperledger

System Management Tasks and Notes

  • System management API (action, alerts, metric) as discussed and outlined here

  • System management Agent (see same document above outlining the agent functionality and duties)

  • Potentially explore "Gateway management" to include:
    • Demonstrate basic management of EdgeX via select 3rd party console (ex: VMware Pulse IoT Center, System Center, …)
    • Demonstrate EdgeX software updates
    • Updates to non-EdgeX components (drivers, end-devices)
  • Explore alternate deployment/orchestration options (e.g. Kubernetes)

Testing/QA

  • Performance tests on startup time, request/response times on all APIs, latency to actuation from device service collection, through core data, to rules engine, command back to a device service.
    • Performance metric testing will include CPU and memory usage statistics
  • Security testing framework
  • Improved unit and integration testing across all EdgeX microservices
    • Returning unit test coverage to ~80%
    • Requires some Go code refactoring and decoupling among resources (like the database, logging, etc.)
    • Use of mock objects to isolate functions under test.

Target Performance

  • The target is to run all of EdgeX (all the services to include the virtual device service) on a Raspberry Pi 3 (1 GB RAM, 64bit CPU, at least 32GB storage space, running Raspbian Linux distro)

    • This is not an endorsement of the platform as our favorite or otherwise endorsed platform

    • It only suggests the general characteristics of a “developer community” target platform

    • This may not be entirely feasible without all Go replacements, but is the target and the development community will report back when/where this is not possible

    • For example, it is unlikely the target security implementation will fit on this size platform

  • Additional “developer community” targets

    • Startup in 1 minute or less (post OS boot – from micro service start to all services up and available)

    • Throughput for one piece of data (with one IP device connected by hard wire – versus WiFi) from data ingestion at the Device Service layer, through Core Data, to Rules Engine and back down through Command Service finally to Device Service for actuation will be < 1 second

Stretch Goals for the Release

  • Facilitate East/West capability
    • Micro service load balancing, failover, scale-over, ...
    • Device from EdgeX A triggers action on device on EdgeX B
  • Address data privacy concerns
    • EU laws and affirmation about data use/storage/etc.
    • HIP-A
  • Explore streaming analytic needs/implementations
  • Address multi-tenancy needs

Items for consideration

These items are suggestion for Delhi or later releases that have not yet been fully vetted or voted on by the TSC, but will be reviewed as part of an upcoming meeting.  Items in this list may be moved to the roadmap for other releases or discarded entirely.

  • The EdgeX configuration today is flat - meaning a single layer of key/value pairs with no groups or other structure.  Configuration should, in the future, be categorized and grouped under a sub-structure to simplify the exploration and updating the config.  For example, all properies related to MongoDB connection (host, username, password, etc) would be grouped under a MongoDB configuration structure. 
  • Downsampling: It is mentioned that the device service may receive from the device new unattended readings (e.g. in a pub/sub type of scenario). In this case, there should be a setting to specify whether we accept all readings or we decide to downsample because the source is pumping data too fast. This is actually a very common scenario when you deal with high frequency sensor packages.

  • Command: in order to protect the device from harmful commands, there should be the possibility to set a Min and Max limit for the value that is accepted on every single command.  in fact the command service today is rather a hollow simple proxy, but in the future we very much envisioned adding additional security, caching to avoid having to hit the DS when unnecessary, and even grouping command requests for better resource conservation (especially for devices like BLE that get woken up when you hit them).

  • Data Transformation: This is something we have always considered as a potential in EdgeX – that of a filter, even a small transformation engine between device services and core data. Not a full blown export, but something that serves in a similar fashion and was common across services. We even thought about making it some type of quick CEP/rules engine feeder for those decisions that can’t wait to go through the rest of the layers.

  • Revisited and improved security threat model.
  • Implementation of message bus alternative for intercommunication between microservices as an alternative to REST.

    While REST will not go away (a REST API will still exist around each micro service), there may be a need to implement point-to-point messaging between select services or to adopt some type of message bus unilaterally across all of EdgeX to support messaging among services.

    Messaging provides for more asynchronous communications, typically lower latency communications, and better (or more finely tuned) communication quality of service (QoS).  Are there places where messaging might be more appropriate (like between core data and export distro today).  Would a use case dictate the use of an alternate messaging infrastructure be used among all services with an underlying message bus to support it?  Would alternate protocols (SNMP, WebSockets, etc.) be desired in some use cases?  For the Delhi release, some alternate communication requirements, design and early message implementation experimentation is likely to occur.

  • Should we allow configuration properties be overriden by command line provided properties (like Java allows/provides) for our Go services?

  • No labels