universal
`p|ug&p|ay
`
`QUARTERLY PUBLICATION
`
`
`
`Volume II
`
`Fourth Quarter 2000
`
`First Anniversary Sees Many Accomplishments
`Salim AbiEzzi, Ph.D., Microsoft Corp., Steering Committee Chair
`
`October 18, 2000, marked the first
`
`including a Web site, mailing lists, and
`
`networking, our ultimate definition of
`
`success for this coming year ought to be
`
`achieving market success and the satisfac-
`
`tion of early UPnP solution adopters.We will
`
`only succeed ifwe deliver the products, and
`
`the customer buys and is happy.
`
`It is my pleasure to be part of this effort
`
`I look forward to continuing the journey
`
`with the rest of the Forum membership
`
`towards this objective.
`Remember that each of us Forum
`
`participants has a role to play to make
`
`UPnP successfu|,and through that,
`
`expand the business opportunities for
`
`our companies. 3
`
`anniversary of the UPnP Steering
`
`Committee and, hence, the UPnP Forum at
`
`large. Looking back we've accomplished
`
`much towards our objectives:
`
`0 Launched six Working Committees,
`
`which are producing standards for about 30
`devices including 80 services.
`
`0 Grew the Forum's membership to
`
`more than 260 companies, including new
`
`members Sun Microsystems; Dell Computer
`Corp.; and Samsung Electronic Co., Ltd.
`
`0 Held a Plug Fest in September
`2000 with over 50 attendees from 19 com-
`
`panies representing more than 35 devices.
`
`- Finalized and approved version
`1.0 of the UPnP Device Architecture in
`June 2000.
`
`0 Held two Summit events with
`
`hundreds of participants and some early
`
`product demonstrations.
`
`- Defined the different processes
`that are needed to run the Forum and its
`
`entities. (See the Members Only section of
`the UPnP Forum Web site.)
`
`0 Launched theTechnica| Committee
`and established its charter.
`
`0 Created technical infrastructure
`
`for standard device descriptions, including
`
`templates, guidelines, samples, and
`conventions.
`
`specification archival facility.
`- Established the commitment
`
`statements for Steering Committee mem-
`
`bers, Working Committee chairpersons, and
`voting members.
`
`0 Defined the Steering Committee
`election process and conducted the first
`
`election, fully web—based, in which Xerox
`Corp., lnvensys Contro|s,and Eastman
`
`Kodak Co. replaced Sony Corp., Matsushita
`Electric Industrial Company Ltd. (MEl),and
`Echelon Corp.
`
`0 Launched our first newsletter,
`Connections.
`
`Toward Holiday 2001:
`Happy Early Adopters
`
`The next year carries both challenges
`
`and opportunities for us. On the one hand,
`
`the industry needs to focus on a few win-
`
`ning end-user scenarios and deliver these
`
`scenarios in the first round of UPnP prod-
`
`ucts for the Holiday 2001 season. On the
`
`other hand, the UPnP Forum needs to
`
`finalize the right set of standard device
`
`descriptions and to launch the certification
`
`program in time for these products to get
`
`tested and certified. Industry needs to start
`
`and drive this process; the Forum is but an
`enabler and a means to that end.
`
`0 Established administrative infra-
`
`As a community that cares about fur-
`
`structure for the functioning of the Forum,
`
`thering the quality of life through invisible
`
`HAPPY ANNIVERSARY
`
`universal
`plug&p|ay
`
`rhea‘!
`Standard,o,
`La
`
`
`
`UP&P FORUM ESTABLISHED
`OCTOBER 18,1999
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015
`
`

`

`news & events
`
`The Fourth Summit of the UPnP Forum
`
`Arlene Binuya Murray, Microsoft Corp., Forum Executive Administrator
`
`The UPnP Forum held its fourth Summit
`
`(Linux) and Microsoft (Vlfindows).There was also
`
`meeting on November 9-10,2000, in Redmond,
`Washington. In the months prior to the Summit,
`Forum membership rose to over 270 companies,
`many of whom turned out in force at the event
`The mix of many new members with existing
`members at the meeting generated numerous
`networking and information exchange opportu-
`nities.This networking opportunity was spot-
`lighted by a joint demonstration on the first day
`from Lantronix and Premise Systems,who met
`previously at the UPnP Forum Partner Pavilion at
`the CEDIA Expo in Indianapolis in September
`2000. Thejoint demonstration utilized a net-
`work device server (Lantronix) and automation
`software (Premise) in a motion sensor camera.
`This demonstration can be seen online at
`
`www.upnp.org in the on-dernand webcast sec-
`tion for the Fourth Summit meeting.Another
`compelling scenario demonstration at the
`Summit included a Microsoft demonstration of
`
`of digital pictures distributed via a PC-based
`service to PCs and laptops (emulating digital
`picture frames) on a wireless network (802.1 1b).
`In the keynote speech, Jon DeVaan,Senior
`Vice President of Microsoft's TV Platform and
`
`Services Group shared Microsoft's .NET strategy
`and vision. DeVaan underscored how vital UPnP
`
`is in helping aeate the ultimate connected
`home experience.
`The main thrust of the second day was the
`testing and certification process for UPnP-
`enabled devices and services. Members were
`
`introduced to UPnP test requirements, test tools
`and methodology. In addition, there was a pre-
`view of the device certification process. Other
`second day material included updates on Device
`and Software Development kits from Intel
`
`a walk-through of a sample device description
`to aid members who are writing devices and
`service specifications.
`The first appearance of a UPnP Partner
`Pavilion added a new element to the to the
`Summit.The Pavilion was accessible to atten-
`
`dees throughout the event and showcased
`products from member companies, including
`Allegro Software Development Corporation;
`Canon, Inc; Couch Potato Pro, Inc; Lantronix, |nc.;
`
`Metro Link, |nc.; muNEl', Inc; Premise Systems,
`lnc.and Siemens AG.
`
`The Second UPnP Plug Fest was announced
`during the Summit. Metro Link, Inc. will host the
`event in Fort Lauderdale, Florida,January 17-18,
`2001. A link to further details, including the mles
`of engagement and registration, is available at
`www.upnp.org.
`
`The key takeaway from the event was a call
`to Forum members to gear up their focus on
`UPnP product development to have certified
`devices ready and in market by the Holiday 2001
`season. This timeline corresponds with signifi-
`cant product release schedules for multiple
`forum members — an excellent opportunity to
`capitalize on market momentum for products.
`Intel and Microsoft were formal sponsors of
`the Fourth Summit meeting. Many thanks to
`both of them for staging an excellent event. If
`you have any comments and suggestions on
`what you would like to see in the next Summit,
`please e—rnail the Forum Administrator, Arlene
`Binuya-Murray at arleneb@microsoft.com.
`Note: Slide presentations from the Fourth
`UPnP Summit are available on the UPnP.org Web
`site at wvvw.upnp.org/events.htm.
`
`UPnP at the Intel Developer Forum
`
`Andrew Liu, Intel Corp., Forum Member
`Read this article at www.upnp.org/wintemewsletter/newshtm
`
`CEDIA Expo 2000 Partner Pavilion Update
`
`Richard Dunda, Microsoft Corp., Marketing Committee Chair
`Read this article at www.upnp.org/wintemewsletter/news.htm 53!
`
`First UPnP Plug Fest
`
`Preston Hunt, Intel Corp., Forum Member
`
`Intel hosted the first-ever UPnP Plug Fest
`in September, just three months after the 1.0
`release of the UPnP architecture specification.
`Over 50 people from 19 companies met in
`Beaverton, Oregon, for this two-day engineer-
`ing event. Hardware and software engineers
`from large and small companies worked
`together to ensure maximum compatibility
`and interoperability between their UPnP
`products. More than 35 UPnP devices were
`tested and debugged.
`The event was a resounding success, with
`most participants agreeing that it was ‘invalu-
`able.’ Many people expressed interest in hold-
`ing another Plug Fest within the next three
`months.
`59
`
`Election 2000: Steering
`Committee Election Results
`
`Arlene Binuya Murray, Microsoft Corp.,
`Forum Executive Administrator
`
`Elections to the Steering Committee were
`held in September 2000 by an e-rnail and online
`vote of active rnembers.Three new members
`
`were elected to the Steering Committee:
`Eastman Kodak Co, lnvensys Controls, and Xerox
`Corp. In addition,the following companies were
`re-elected to the Steering Committee: Axis
`Communications,Canon |nc., Compaq Computer
`Corporation, Honeywell, IBM Corp., and
`Mitsubishi Electric Corp.
`On the Forum's Founding Anniversary,
`October 18, 2000, they joined the eleven current
`seated members of the Steering Committee:
`Broadcom Corp.; Cisco Systems; Ericsson Mobile
`Communications AB; General Electric; Hewlett-
`Packard Co.; Intel Corp; Microsoft Corp; Panja,
`lnc.; Philips Consumer Electronics; Siemens AG;
`and Thomson Consumer Electronics.
`
`Thank you to all candidates who came
`forward to nominate yourselves to the UPnP
`Steering Committee.Thank you to all voters who
`cast a ballot.
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015
`
`

`

`Update on the UPnP Standards Archive
`
`Steve limm, Microsoft Corp, Forum Member
`
`This article provides a brief update on the
`status of the UPnP archive followed by a descrip-
`tion of a best-in-practice design approach. UPnP
`draft standards including, 22 devices containing
`57 services, are available for viewing within the
`UPnP archive at www.upnp.org/members.This
`averages out to more than a dozen new designs
`each month! The table to the right (see Figure 1)
`summarizes the approval status of designs.
`Many of the maturing designs currently at
`Template Preliminary Design (TPD) status are
`expected to move to Template Design Complete
`(TDC) before the end of 2000 to enable product
`development.
`
`Definitions:
`
`TDS: Template Design Starts - first drafts submit-
`ted to Working Committees
`
`TPD: Template Preliminary Designs - designs
`incorporate input from Working Committees
`
`TDC-Template Design Complete — no known
`design issues ensures stability for impIernenta—
`tion
`
`Common Services and Best—in-Practice
`
`Design Approaches
`As UPnP designs mature.a number of com-
`mon services are emerging for use as building
`blocks in constructing UPnP devices. Examples
`of common services include SwitchPower,
`
`ProgrammabIeTrmer, and an Eventscheduler. In
`addition to common services,a number of best-
`
`in—practice design approaches for UPnP are
`emerging. As one example, the recommended
`design approach for transferring bulk data is
`described below.
`
`Definitions:
`Bulk data transfer — data of unknown size
`and format
`
`Out-of-band - data transfers using a protocol
`layer that is not specifically defined by UPnP
`In-band - data transfers using a protocol layer
`defined by the UPnP Device Architecture
`
`SOAP - Simple Object Access Protocol used to
`encapsulate a UPnP Action request or response
`
`Method for Bulk Data Transfers
`
`Several Working Committees have adopted
`a method for transferring bulk data for applica-
`tions, including sending data to a printer and
`acquiring an image from a security camera.The
`approach has been reviewed and recommended
`by the UPnP Technical Committee. Bulk data
`transfers may be large compared to the memory
`
`available in low-cost appli-
`
`figure 1. UPnP device andservice standards
`
`ances. Further, the size of a
`bulk transfer is typically
`unknown.The design chal-
`lenge is to incrementally
`compose the data within the
`memory constraints of the
`source device, while transfer-
`
`50
`
`30
`
`20
`
`No.ofStandards
`
`I0
`
`ring data at a rate consistent
`with the rendering device's
`memory constraints and
`application processing
`requirements.
`For example, if a printer is
`the rendering device, it is
`desirable for the print server
`to begin processing the data prior to download-
`ing the entire print fiIe.This requires a transport
`protocol with dynamic flow control to deter-
`mine when the rendering device's memory
`buffer (in this example, the printer's) is ready for
`more data.
`
`In-band vs. Out-of—band Transfers
`
`For UPnP in-band data transfers via SOAP,
`
`UPnP action requests can take advantage of
`underlying HTTP transfer encoding to satisfy
`flow control requirements discussed above.
`Transfers must be bracketed by SOAP XML,
`which requires a special parser.This restriction
`goes away ifdata is transferred out-of-band
`using l-TITP.
`For UPnP,the underlying HTTP/TCP/IP proto-
`col stack provides a simple, effective out-of-band
`method for transferring large bulk data between
`low cost app|iances.The advantages of this
`approach include:
`
`0 Raw binary transfers require no additional
`encoding overhead.
`
`0 The asynchronous action timeout of 30
`seconds does not apply to out-of band transfers.
`
`0 HTTP 1.1 provides bi-directional light-
`weight methods for bulk data transfer:The GET
`method for bulk data retrieval from server to
`
`dient.The POST method for sending bulk data
`from client to server.
`
`0 HTTP 1.1 uses the content-type header to
`indicate the nature of the content fomiat
`
`("imagefJpeg','for example). Specialty MIME types
`can be defined for binary data that is different
`from existing types.
`
`0 Since HTTP nomially uses TCP, flow control
`is available to the rendering device so that it can
`
`TDS
`
`TPD
`Status of Standards
`
`TDC
`
`manage arrival of data necessary to process one
`buffer at a time.
`
`- HTTP 1.1 includes a chunked encoding
`mechanism that allows applications to create
`data for transmission incrementally, without
`knowing the full content length prior to trans-
`mission.A MaxChunkSize parameter can provide
`size negotiation so that the receiving device can
`avoid buffer over-flows.
`
`UPnP Design Considerations
`Out-of-band data transfers via HTTP may be
`invoked by simply passing a URL as an argument
`to a UPnP action.A generic URL may be used
`for all transfers to/and from a given device.
`Alternately,a unique URL may be used to associ-
`ate state infomration with a specific transfer.
`There are two approaches differentiated as
`push or pull. For push,a source control point
`could HTTP POSTthe data to a URL exposed by
`the rendering device. For pu||,a rendering device
`could pull the data via an HTTP GET from a URL
`exposed by the source device.
`One advantage of the push approach is that
`it may eliminate the need for the client control
`point to host an HTTP server (if it doesn't already
`subscribe to eventing, which requires GENAI
`HTIP extensions). Another advantage of the
`push approach is the provision of a natural fire-
`wall where the control point can initiate a con-
`nection with the rendering device, but the
`reverse connection may not be possible.
`In conclusion, UPnP provides the flexibility to
`leverage lower layers of the protocol stack
`where this makes sense, thereby keeping UPnP
`designs simple and effective.
`5.:
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015 3
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015
`
`

`

`member sotli ht
`
`Kodak Joins UPnP Forum to Make Digital Photography
`Easier for Consumers
`
`Mark D. Wood, Eastman Kodak Co., Forum Member
`
`Kodak's business is pictures, and our goal is to make picture taking and sharing as easy as possible
`forthe consumer. Digital capture and display devices are becoming part of a larger digital home
`'ecosystem,"and ease of use requires imaging devices to interoperate transparently with each other
`and with other, multipurpose devices in the home.
`Kodak has joined the UPnP Forum because it offers a solution to a problem our customers are
`facing. UPnP enables us to deliver the connectivity capabilities our customers want, provide the ease
`of use they expect from us, and simplify product developrnent.As a member of the UPnP Steering
`Committee, Kodak will help drive UPnP toward a vision we all share, one where technology ‘just
`works‘ for consumers.
`
`Kodak has a wealth of experience in making easy-to-use systems, and a deep understanding of
`imaging technologies and standards.We will actively work with the Imaging Working Committee to
`help define what imaging devices such as digital still cameras and electronic picture frames look like,
`and how they should interact with other services. Our goal is to make it easy for the consumer to get
`high quality results. Ho|istic,'big picture'thinking is required here.The many hard-working UPnP
`members who joined before us have already laid a sizeable technical foundation. Now is the time to
`develop total solutions for consumers.
`Pictures are the universal language,understood everywhere. UPnP can make digital imaging easy
`and pervasive — truly universal — which is just what our customers wan
`:2
`
`U Pn P in Industrial Automation
`
`Heinrich Munz, KUKA Roboter GmbH, Forum Member
`
`Industrial Automation faces nearly the same problems as home and small office networks.
`As new members to UPnP,we are interested in collaborating with other members on these issues.
`The world of Industrial Automation (IA) is changing from centralized Programmable Logic
`Controller (PLC) and field bus-driven systems towards distributed inteI|igence.These distributed systems
`often use Vlfindows CE‘ and Windows’ PC-based controllers with TCPIIP Ethernet.
`
`There are currently three different approaches to use TCPIIP in IA:
`0 Ethernet Industrial Protocol (IP). Driven by Rockwell Automation, Ethernet IP simply puts the old
`Control and Infomration Protocol (CIP) coming from the field busses DeviceNet and ControINet on top
`ofTCP/IP.
`
`0 ProfiNet. Driven by Siemens, the initial ProfiNet uses TCPIIP Ethernet as a configuration medium
`for all of the field devicesflhe old Profibus field bus handles real-tirne communication.
`
`0 Interface for Distributed Automation (IDA): IDA is the most modern approach because it does not
`use the old field bus and is supported by several suppliers including Kliipper und Vlfiege Software
`GmbH;Jetter AG; KUKA Roboter GmbH; Lenze GmbH & Co. KG; Phoenix Contact; Real-Time Innovations,
`
`Inc. (R11); Schneider Electric; and Sid( AG. IDA is a working task force developing specifications, proto-
`cols. For more information, visit www.idagroup.org.
`
`IAONA Trade Group
`An organization, Industrial Automation Open Networking Alliance (IAONA), is focusing on indus-
`trial Ethemet.The IAONA trade group has more than 100 member companies with branches in the
`United States (wvvw.iaona.corn/) and Europe (www.iaona-eu.comI). IDA is going to merge with IAONA.
`Further, there are discussions between IAONA and other groups pursuing other Ethernet approaches.
`IAONA could be an umbrella organization for working groups dealing with Ethernet in IA.
`
`Common Challenges
`While the different groups have their specific engineering and control protocols on top ofTCPIIP,
`there are several common problems and open questions. Questions remain about cabling for industry;
`connectors; infrastructure devices, such as switches, hubs and routers; and network (web—based) rnan—
`agement and device profiles.
`
`A Successful U PnP Partnership
`
`Richard E. Geasey, Lantronix, Forum Member
`
`When Lantronix joined the UPnP Forum last
`year,the company hoped to benefit from work-
`ing with industry leaders to enhance and extend
`the capabilities of its Device Server“ products
`through a networkable,standards-based device
`control protocol. Lantronix believed in the ability
`of the UPnP organization to release a standard
`that greatly simplifies the implementation of
`device networks in home and corporate environ-
`ments. However, the company never imagined
`the benefits gained by forming relationships
`with UPnP members — big and small.
`Shortly after joining the Forum, members
`suggested that Lantronix speak with another
`UPnP member, Premise Systems. Forum mem-
`bers recognized that Premise Systems and
`Lantronix developed complementary technolo-
`gies and encouraged us to work together to
`develop UPnP demonstrations to showcase at
`various events.
`
`Companies Work Together for Mutual Gain
`‘When the members of the UPnP Forum
`
`began talking about Premise Systems software,
`it was apparent that Lantronix could benefit
`from their technologies and expertise,’ said Fred
`Thiel, Lantronix CEO."Our focus is on hardware
`
`connectivity solutions, and Premise Systems
`offered a logical software complement.What we
`did not count on was the ease of integration and
`the potential breadth of solutions that opened
`once we began working together."
`Realizing that UPnP Forum members were
`right, both companies saw the benefits of work-
`ing together. By combining Premise Systems
`SYS"" home and business automation software
`
`with Lantronix’ Device ServerTechnology, the
`companies opened the door to new applications
`based on UPnP protocols.
`
`The Sky is the Limit
`Premise Systems and Lantronix began brain-
`storming potential applications.The UPnP vision
`laid the foundation and the protocol provided
`the technical means to develop proof-of-con-
`cept demonstrations. Both groups realized the
`combination of UPnP, Lantronix Device Servers
`
`and Premise Systems software virtually eliminat-
`ed the technical barriers encountered when
`
`inter-connecting and controlling off—the—sheIf
`devices.The biggest challenge for the two com-
`panies was deciding what to create, given the
`levels of confidence and excitement that devel-
`
`oped once they realized the potential.The feeling
`was,"'lhe sky is the limit.’
`
`UPnP r'n Industriaurrnorrration, continuedon page 5
`
`ASuccessfrrlUPnPPann¢rsIrb,contr'nuedonpag¢B
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015
`
`

`

`Xerox Joins the UPnP Steering Committee
`
`Nancy Glover, Xerox Corp., Forum Member
`
`The primary goal of UPnP,enab|ing the use of devices and services without complicated setup or
`configuration, is also a key objective for Xerox.We see UPnP as a technology that will enable us to
`simplify the integration of document devices, services and systems.We want to be involved in the
`development of UPnP standards so we can help address issues relating to UPnP support.
`Xerox has been an active participant in the UPnP Forum since it was founded in 1999.0ur seat on
`the Steering Committee will enable us to broaden our involvement. Xerox will work on the Steering
`Cornmittee,Technical Committee, and Marketing Committee as well as in the areas of business devel-
`opment, legal counsel and public relations.
`We will continue our work on the Imaging Working Committee, where we've contributed to defin-
`ing a new UPnP Page Description Language and printing device and service templates. Xerox is also a
`member of the newly formed Scanning Subcommittee.
`Xerox has invented much of the technology that has made networking possible, including the
`graphical user interface, the mouse, Ethernet, object-oriented programming, laser printing and many of
`the basic lntemet protocols. Some of the strengths that we bring to UPnP efforts are a long history of
`networking know-how; a long history in the standards community;a robust and varied background in
`connectivity, discovery and service protocols standards for the networking environment; and a desire
`to guide the integration of UPnP into enterprise networks.
`
`lnvensys Controls Brings Factory Networking Experience and
`Residential Appliance Expertise to UPnP
`
`D. Mitchell Carr, lnvensys Controls, Forum Member
`
`lnvensys is a $15 billion worldwide manufacturing, software and services company solely focused
`on industrial, commercial and residential controls and automation.A typical United States household
`contains between 100 and 200 control devices manufactured by lnvensys. By active participation in
`the Steering,Technica| and Working Committees, lnvensys will enable a multitude of senrice capabili-
`ties to the home, such as remote HVAC and appliance diagnostics.
`lnvensys is nearing completion on the development of a residential Contro|Server“" Control Point
`for networking UPnP devices and a Communications Module product that will, in one fonn, be a
`bridge to non—UPnP devices.
`lnvensys has been an active participant in both the Home Automation and Security Working
`Committee and the Appliances Working Committee, with a clear charter to supervise and manage low-
`level networks under UPnP. Now on the Steering Committee, lnvensys will propose an Industrial
`Automation (IA) Working Committee focused on introducing UPnP to the factory floor. By active partic-
`ipation in the Steering Committee,the Technical Committee and Working Groups, lnvensys will be able
`to contribute over 25 years of experience in factory networking and deterministic distributed. real—tirne
`control to the UPnP organization. lnvensys will also actively endorse and promote the use of UPnP as a
`superior network protocol for control and automation in the areas of residential, commercial and
`industrial systems.
`Members interested in participating in an IA Working Committee are asked to contact Mitchell
`Carr at mcarr@invensyscontrols.com or Michael Mathur at mmathur@foxboro.com. 5:
`
`UPnP in bndusniamuromarion, oontinuedfrorn pagu
`
`One of the biggest obstacles to today's automation is the configuration and management effort
`required in a plant, which requires very well trained, expensive staff. It is clear that a new paradigm like
`TCP/IP-Ethernet based automation must lower the configuration and management effort by far.
`
`UPnP and Industrial Automation
`
`The situation in IA is similar to the UPnP initiative: many different devices connected to each other
`on TCP/IP networks, where the systems must run without management staff such as network adminis-
`trators around all the time.
`
`Since the problems in the two different environments are very similar, it would be very useful to
`use UPnP in IA as well. All theTCP/IP Ethernet technologies should be based on UPnP. KUKA Roboter is
`very interested in participating in IA efforts with other UPnP members. :3
`
`develo - er tools
`
`Microsoft UPnP
`
`Development Kit
`
`Steve Judkins, Microsoft Corp., Fomm Member
`
`Beta 2 of the Microsoft UPnP Development
`Kit is now available at www.microsoft.com/
`
`hwdev/upnpl. Beta 2 of the kit includes signifi-
`cant revisions to the reference source code, tools
`and documentation.
`
`The UPnP Sample device runs on Vlfindows
`CE or Windows 2000°;and the source code
`includes implementations of UPnP discovery,
`control, and eventing as well as XML parsing.
`Configuring and running the device is now a
`couple of steps with the new Configuration
`Vlfizard.
`
`Updated tools include a Generic User
`Control Point (UCP) tool for Vlfindows ME that
`
`helps find devices by UDN or asynchronously by
`type, query the service state variables, invoke
`actions, and view eventing information.
`Microsoft Network Monitor (Netrnon) parsers
`that allow filtering and formatting SSDP and
`SOAP messages are also included.
`The documentation has been reorganized to
`make it easier to find information.The sample
`code has been completely commented; includes
`compilation instructions for Vlfindows CE; and
`includes Windows ME API documentation for
`
`developing control point applications.
`
`UPnP SDK for Linux
`
`Dan Baumberger, Intel Corp., Forum Member
`
`In August, Intel released the 1.0 version of
`the UPnP Software Development Kit (SDK) for
`Linux.The SDK provides full control point and
`device functionality to all flavors of Linux.
`This release adds many new features to the
`July beta release including an integrated web
`server, automatic resubscriptions, automatic
`renewals of announcements, a small XML parser
`optimized for UPnP, the ability to automatically
`update the desaiption document with the cor-
`rect IP address in DI-ICP and AutolP environ-
`
`ments, and numerous bug fixes. Intel subse
`quently released a minor update in October to
`address issues discovered during the first UPnP
`Plug Fest.
`The SDK and associated documentation can
`
`be downloaded from httpi/upnp.source
`forge.net/. For general information about the
`UPnP SDK for Linux, and to learn more about
`
`how it helps the industry, please visit Intel's UPnP
`web site at www.inteI.comfiaVupnp/. E
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015 5
`
`Netflix, Inc. Exhibit 1015
`
`

`

`committee re - orts
`
`Overview of Localization Principles from the Technical Committee
`
`Jeffrey Schlimmer; Microsoft Corp., Technical Committee Chair
`
`One of the recent accomplishments of
`Technical Committee is an overview of localiza-
`
`tion princip|es.To enable localized UPnP devices,
`consider the following steps in UPnP networking.
`
`Addressing and Discovery
`Actually, there's nothing locale-specific about
`obtaining an IP address.
`Similarly, there's nothing locale-specific in the
`discovery process. Discovery solves the problem
`of getting a URL to a device.To keep discovery
`simple, the advertisement for (and response
`from) a device lists unique ID, device type(s), and
`service type(s). None of these programmatic
`tokens are locale-spedfic
`
`Description
`A device description contains two elements
`that should be locaIized:friendlyNarne and
`rnodeIDescription. Other elements may also be
`localized, e.g., icons, manufacturer,
`manufacturerURL mode|Name, mode|Number,
`rnodeIURl., and seria|Number.
`To retrieve the localized description, control
`points should use the ACCEPT— I CONTENT—LAN—
`GUAGE feature of HTTP.SpedficaIly,a control
`point may indude an HTTP ACCEPT—LANGUAGE
`header in the request for a device (or service)
`description; ifan ACCEPT-LANGUAGE header is
`present in the request,the response must include
`a CONTENT-LANGUAGE header to identify the
`description's language. (Note that HTTP does not
`require the CONTENT-LANGUAGE header in the
`response; UPnP adds this requirement.)
`lfa control point does not include an HTTP
`ACCEPT-LANGUAGE header in the request for a
`device or service description, the device may
`return the description in its currently configured,
`default language,which is not necessarily United
`States (U.S.) English.
`
`Control and Eventing
`Unlike device descriptions, control and
`eventing should not use locale-specific values.
`Instead, most action arguments and state vari-
`ables should use values that are expressed in a
`localeindependent manner, and applications
`should convert and/or fomrat the information
`
`from a standard form into the correct language
`and/or fomrat for the locale.
`
`For example, dates are represented in a
`localeindependent fomrat (ISO 8601 ), and inte
`gers are represented without locale-specific for-
`
`matting (e.g., no currency symbol, no grouping
`of digits).
`String values should be represented in either
`a locale-independent manner or a standard
`'localeCAs an example of the latter, the values ‘on:
`‘standby; and 'off'for a power state variable are in
`the language of UPnP standards (US. English)
`and do not reflect strings intended to be dis-
`played in a localized user interface.
`However,sorne values may be intended for
`the user interface and therefore must be local-
`ized. If a state variable is intended for the user
`
`interface instead of programmatic control, then
`this must be clearly indicated in the Service
`Template. (Note that there is no explicit indica-
`tion of this in the XML of the service description.)
`This option should not be exercised lightly,
`because introducing locale-specific values great-
`ly complicates standards, certification, and appli-
`cation development. For example, testing and
`certification becomes more complex because it is
`defined in terms of the inputloutput and state
`changes of the service.
`Application development will be more com-
`plex because applications will have to parse
`localized strings in order trigger appropriate
`actions. For example, consider a service that
`includes a GetWeatherForecast0 action; if it
`
`returns RAlN|NG,a home automation program
`can use that to close the windows, whereas if it
`
`was to return a localized string,the home
`automation application would have to parse the
`string to find out what the weather is.
`Moreover, there may be some cases where
`an action's behavior is locale-dependent. For
`example, due to telephony regu|ations,a
`DialModem0 action may need to behave in a
`country—specific manner.There are several
`options in this situation:
`- An argument could be defined to indicate
`the locale, perhaps using the same encoding as
`the ACCEPT-/CONTENT-LANGUAGE headers (RFC
`
`1766). Ifthere are multiple Iocaledependent
`actions, the service may include an action to set a
`state variable to indicate the locale and eliminate
`
`the need to pass a locale identifier separately to
`each action.
`
`0 Devices may have a physical interface, such
`as a front panel,for configuring locale.
`0 Devices may have a presentation page for
`configuring locale.
`
`Presentation
`
`UPnP does not extend HTML for presenta-
`tion; whatever mechanisms HTML provides for
`localization, such as the META tag with charset
`attribute, should be used for presentation pages.
`To retrieve a localized presentation page, control
`points should use the ACCEPT— / CONTENT-LAN-
`GUAGE feature of HTTP as they would to retrieve
`a localized device description.
`
`Report from the Appliances
`Working Committee
`H. W. (Tom) Tomlinson, General Electric
`Appliances Working Committee Chair
`
`When I tell people that I am working on net-
`worked appliances,I am usually asked,'So what
`does a cofiee pot say to a TV anyway?’ Although
`this question may seem trivial, members of the
`Appliances Working Committee believe net-
`worked appliances will play an important role in
`the connected homecoordinating applia