I find it very strange that as an IoT device this can’t talk IP to a ‘thing’. For IoT devices that natively use TCP/IP (or HTTP) for communication, your telling me you can not use the IMP (something native to it’s WiFi hardware layer for the most part)? That seems as crazy as requiring a secondary device to connect a single wire to the cloud to talk to the IMP for a pin state.
I can see many applications for the IMP without this functionality but I think what is most confusing to me is why the limitation??? As more and more devices have native Wifi built in and will be connected to the local network, the need for wiring to a device to make it IoT or enhance it lessens every day. Requiring the cloud based agent is only limiting the TAM this device applies to.
About security - I do not consider non-expiring, non-authenticated linkbacks for triggers in a cloud service to be secure. Is there a good post or FAQ somewhere that might convince me connecting an imp to a locking mechanism for a residence front door and actuating it through the cloud based Agent model is completely (I know nothing is absolute here, but I think you understand the ask) secure?
I would think it would be much easier to allow local TCP/IP comm (even unauthenticated) as opposed to incorporating a real security model in to the existing Agent structure. Again, why not give the dev the option. This can be extremely simple, very much like the Agent link back structure in place today, even limited to simple variables or integers.
A good example here is iTach - an IR to Wifi gateway. I can send TCP/IP commands directly to the iTach to transmit IR codes. I could NEVER use the imp with it as the latency would be ridiculous and unacceptable (and I have 100Mbps internet service).
Reliability is also a critical area here. How is one expected to make a robust product that people can rely upon but their upstream internet provider is the weak link? I mean the home automation market / home security market alone is huge here and I can’t imagine allowing certain aspects of that to be cloud dependent or cloud operated.
The best part is with the cloud based IDE model, you guys should easily be able to make this an object that dev’s can include, so those that don’t want the overhead of local / direct TCP/IP support don’t need to add it to a project.
Sorry for what might look like a rant. Don’t get me wrong, I really like the imp, just disappointed to see somethings potential be intentionally limited, especially with a massively growing natively connected market.
Is this something that is at least on the roadmap? As a very early adopter of all things tech and someone with a passion for hardware integration, I would be more than willing to talk with someone at imp if they want more of my thoughts in this area. Just let me know