|Re: why do we need mn cse and in cse? [message #1738956 is a reply to message #1738948]
||Tue, 26 July 2016 10:03
| Mahdi Ben Alaya
Registered: November 2013
IN: Infrastructure Node, can be seen as a centralized server deployed on the cloud.
MN : Middle Node, can be sees as a gateway deployed locally.
MNs has the possibility to register to IN and so enable one to obtain a highly distributed architecture covering various use cases.
You can consider an IoT architecture including only one IN if your prefer a centralized architecture, however this use case is not interesting because it requires that all your devices and applications are capable to reach the IN which is not the case for small sensors. The MN can act as a proxy to connect local constrained devices to the IN.
You can also consider an IoT architecture including only one MN deployed locally if you don't need a centralized server, however this is not so recommended because it requires the MN to answer to all coming requests. In general, the MN is a constrained device which may represent a single point of failure in this case. Imagine a use case where your sensors are not deployed on the place which requires more than one MN. In this case, the IN will be the intermediate between all existing MNs.
For me, it is better to have a distributed IoT architecture including one IN and several MNs deployed in several places. The IN will be in charge to re-targeting requests from a Node to another in a seamless way. Applications can be deployed on the IN or on the MNs according to your needs. Each node can host customized services like cool dashboard in the IN, or dedicated interworking proxies in the MNs to connect local vendor-specific devices.
Hope this can help
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.02485 seconds