June 20–23, 2016 | Berlin, Germany
Apr 16, 2017
June 20–23, 2016 | Berlin, Germany
Survey Results: Bridging the Gap Between Open Standards and Open Source
Elizabeth Rose, Open Mobile Alliance
OMA’s Motivation
• Two years ago, OMA started on a journey to understand how it could improve adoption of its service-layer specifications.
• Very quickly we found that Developers are key to widespread adoption.
• We began to create an ecosystem of tools and collaboration around our specifications that allowed for Developers to implement the specifications more easily.
• https://github.com/OpenMobileAlliance/OMA_LwM2M_for_Developers/wiki
• We also ran into the fact that the Developer community is highly oriented toward open source code, projects, tools and associations.
• We launched the survey in an attempt to find better data about how our traditional telco-oriented members are approaching Open Source and how that direction compares to a wider sample.
Survey background
• The purpose of the survey is to help OMA understand the role Open Source Software and Open Source Associations play in our industry.
• Understand prevailing attitudes regarding Open Source and Open Standards.
• Examine what (if anything) OMA should be doing to better serve its members and the industry at large in relation to Open Source projects.
• The survey population:• The industry at large as serviced by the OMA marketing database and social
media
• Survey responses – 419 individual responses including hundreds of text-based, open-ended answers.
• A summary of the survey will be available on the OMA website and will be sent to those who participated in the survey
Public Survey OMA membership breakdown
22%
55%
23%
Is your company a member of the Open Mobile Alliance (OMA)?
Yes No I don't know
Sampling of companies of respondents
Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.
Sampling of companies of respondents
Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.
Sampling of companies of respondents
Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.
Sampling of companies of respondents
Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.
Companies of respondents
12%
9%
11%
28%
40%
Indicate your company's primary business:
Mobile operator Network equipment vendor
Mobile device vendor Software developer
Other (please specify)
Open Standards definition
99%
1%Agree
Disagree
Open Standards are best defined as documents made available to the general public, which are developed (or approved) and maintained via a managed, collaborative, transparent, and consensus-driven process. "Open Standards" facilitate interoperability and data exchange among different products or services and are intended for widespread adoption. (adapted from ITU-T definition)
98%
2% Agree
Disagree
Open Source projects definition
Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.
Public
Open Source projects are best defined as
programs in which the source code is
available to the general public for use
and/or modification from its original design
that is made available under an open
source license. Open source code is
typically created as a collaborative effort in
which programmers improve upon the code
and often share the changes among the
programming community for such projects.
At a high level, open source licenses allow
users the freedom to use, modify, and
distribute the source code without requiring
any further permissions.
OS Project participation
52%25%
23%
Is your company participating in Open Source communities or projects that are relevant to Telecommunications or IOT?
Yes No Not Sure
OS Project participation
If your company is participating in Open Source associations that are relevant to Telecommunications or IOT, please indicate which ones below:
Open Daylight
OpenStack
OPNFV
Open Connectivity Foundation (OIC)
AllSeen
Eclipse Foundation
OS Project participation
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
Op
en
Da
ylig
ht
Op
en
Sta
ck
OP
NF
V
Op
en
Co
nn
ectivity
Fo
un
da
tio
n(O
IC)
AllS
ee
n
Eclip
se
Fo
un
da
tio
n
N/A
Oth
er
(ple
ase
sp
ecify)
If your company is participating in Open Source associations that are relevant to Telecommunications or IOT, please
indicate which ones below:
OS Project participation
41%
37%
19%
3%
How would you characterize your participation in these organizations?
We actively make contributions/pull requests to the code base.We are monitoring the progress of the code base.Our participation is more strategic than operational.We do not participate at all.
OS Project participation
In your opinion, what are your company's goals within these organizations? Check all that apply:
• Accelerate time to market for products/services
• Facilitate interoperability with other products/services
• Actively participate in the development of the code base
• Developer enablement
• Monitor technology advancement
• None
• Other (please specify)
OS Project participation
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
Acce
lera
te t
ime
to m
ark
et
for
pro
du
cts
/se
rvic
es
Fa
cili
tate
inte
rop
era
bili
tyw
ith
oth
er
products/servic…
Active
lyp
art
icip
ate
in
th
ed
eve
lop
me
nt
of
the
co
de
ba
se
De
ve
lop
er
en
ab
lem
en
t
Mo
nito
rte
ch
no
log
ya
dva
nce
me
nt
No
ne
Oth
er
(ple
ase
sp
ecify)
In your opinion, what are your company's goals within these organizations? Check all that apply:
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
My company participates actively in traditional standards bodies:
Standards bodies participation
Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.
Public
• W3C, IETF and ETSI most often cited as adopting policies to accommodate open source software
OS Project participation
57%
2%
29%
12%
Is your company's participation in Open Source organizations increasing, decreasing, or steady?
Increasing Decreasing Steady Don't know
Telecom & IOT Services trends
• Machine to Machine / IOT products and implementations will
• rely heavily on Open Source implementations
• rely heavily on Open Standards based implementations
• rely heavily on proprietary implementations
• Next Gen Telecom / NFV network products and implementations will
• rely heavily on Open Source implementations
• rely heavily on Open Standards based implementations
• rely heavily on proprietary implementations
Please give your opinion on the following statements:
Telecom & IOT Services trends
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Ma
ch
ine
to
Ma
ch
ine
/IO
T p
rod
ucts
an
dim
ple
me
nta
tio
ns w
illre
ly h
ea
vily
on
Op
en
So
urc
eim
ple
me
nta
tio
ns
Ma
ch
ine
to
Ma
ch
ine
/IO
T p
rod
ucts
an
dim
ple
me
nta
tio
ns w
illre
ly h
ea
vily
on
Op
en
Sta
nd
ard
s b
ase
dim
ple
me
nta
tio
ns
Ma
ch
ine
to
Ma
ch
ine
/IO
T p
rod
ucts
an
dim
ple
me
nta
tio
ns w
illre
ly h
ea
vily
on
pro
pri
eta
ryim
ple
me
nta
tio
ns
Ne
xt
Ge
n T
ele
co
m /
NF
V n
etw
ork
pro
du
cts
an
d im
ple
me
nta
tio
ns
will
re
ly h
ea
vily
on
Op
en
So
urc
eim
ple
me
nta
tio
ns
Ne
xt
Ge
n T
ele
co
m /
NF
V n
etw
ork
pro
du
cts
an
d im
ple
me
nta
tio
ns
will
re
ly h
ea
vily
on
Op
en
Sta
nd
ard
sbased…
Ne
xt
Ge
n T
ele
co
m /
NF
V n
etw
ork
pro
du
cts
an
d im
ple
me
nta
tio
ns
will
re
ly h
ea
vily
on
pro
pri
eta
ryim
ple
me
nta
tio
ns
Please give your opinion on the following statements:
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
N/A
Telecom Services trend
In the scope of telecom services deployment, what do you think will be the dominant trend in the next several years?
• Proprietary implementations of non standard specifications
• Proprietary implementations of open standards specifications
• Open source implementations of open standards specifications
• Open source implementations not using open standards
Telecom Services trend
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Proprietaryimplementation of
non standardspecifications
Proprietaryimplementations
of open standardsspecifications
Open sourceimplementations
of open standardsspecifications
Open sourceimplementationsnot using open
standards
In the scope of telecom services deployment, what do you think will be the dominant trend in the next several years?
Increase
Decrease
Stable
No Opinion
RAND + Open Source
36%
4%60%
Do you believe that RAND based specifications can be successfully implemented into Open Source projects?
Yes No Not sure
Complexity and incompatibility of licensing terms often cited as the biggest hurdle.
Telecom Services trend
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Proprietaryimplementation of
non standardspecifications
Proprietaryimplementations
of open standardsspecifications
Open sourceimplementations
of open standardsspecifications
Open sourceimplementationsnot using open
standards
In the scope of telecom services deployment, what do you think will be the dominant trend in the next several years?
Increase
Decrease
Stable
No Opinion
Open Standards + Open Source
Agree70%
Neutral20%
Disagree10%
Open Standards play an entirely different role than Open Source
Open Standards + Open Source
Agree80%Disagree
3%
Neutral17%
The Open Standards community would benefit from a closer relationship to the Open Source community
• Early open source implementations of standards can provide feedback to improve the standard• Open source implementations help with dissemination and proliferation of the standard
Agree77%
Disagree19%
Neutral4%
The Open Source community would benefit from a closer relationship to the Open Standards community.
Open Standards + Open Source
Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.
Public
• Open Standards can help open source communities with overall architecture and system design considerations, quality, interoperability and roadmap.
Question for Operators
Copyright © 2016 Open Mobile Alliance Ltd. All rights reserved.
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
We
dep
loy
Op
enSo
urc
e so
ftw
are
ino
ur
net
wo
rks
Ou
r n
etw
ork
ish
ost
ed in
an
Op
enSo
urc
e en
able
d C
lou
d
Op
en S
ou
rce
soft
war
e w
ill p
lay
anin
crea
sin
gly
imp
ort
ant
role
in o
ur
pro
cure
men
t…
Op
en S
ou
rce
rep
rese
nts
an
op
po
rtu
nit
y to
sign
ific
antl
y d
ecre
ase
op
erat
ing
cost
s
Op
en S
ou
rce
soft
war
e cr
eate
s th
ep
ote
nti
al f
or
risk
san
d w
e av
oid
usi
ng
itin
mis
sio
n c
riti
cal…
We
rely
on
ou
rve
nd
ors
to
mit
igat
ean
y ri
sks
asso
ciat
edw
ith
Op
en S
ou
rce
cod
e an
d w
e d
o n
ot…
Op
en S
ou
rce
soft
war
e ad
op
tio
n is
a w
ork
-in
-pro
gres
san
d w
e al
low
it in
ou
rn
etw
ork
wit
h c
auti
on
We
do
no
t u
se O
pen
Sou
rce
in o
ur
pro
du
cts
Agree Neutral Disagree
Please give your opinion on which statements most accurately reflect your understanding of your company's approach to deploying Open Source software
Open ended questions
What are the inhibitors to adoption of Open Source implementations?
• Issues surrounding licensing (esp. GPL)
• Industry understanding of Open Source licensing
• Competitive issues and fragmentation
• Security
• Quality and robustness
• Maintenance and support
OMA’s Steps
• OMA has taken some specific steps to make its specifications easier for Developers to consume.
• Developer Focused Specifications and Tools• LwM2M device management protocol for constrained devices (esp. IoT)
• Developer Toolkit is available on GitHubhttps://github.com/OpenMobileAlliance/OMA_LwM2M_for_Developers/wiki
• GotAPI a secure framework for smartphone web apps to access external devices and internal apps through Web-standard technologies supported by major Web browsers and smartphone platforms
• NTT DOCOMO provides Open Source Plug-ins with device WebAPIs available at https://github.com/DeviceConnect
• Licensing• OMA produces technical specifications that may contain RAND IPR.
• OMA also produces supporting documents that are designed to make implementations (code) easier to produce. These documents contain .dtd, .xsd, .xml.
• OMA has agreed to license the supporting documents under a BSD-3 license. The license does include a pointer to OMA IPR declarations.
• The goal is to make supporting documents easier to distribute and hopefully more valuable to developers.
OMA’s Steps
•We would love to hear from you!
•Want to respond to the survey and share your opinions?•See https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/OSSurveyR2