Advertisement

Viability of an Uncomplicated IoT SaaS Development for Deployment of DIY Applications Over HTTP with Zero Investment

  • Sujanavan TiruvayipatiEmail author
  • Ramadevi Yellasiri
Conference paper
Part of the Learning and Analytics in Intelligent Systems book series (LAIS, volume 3)

Abstract

IoT administrations are ordinarily conveyed of IoT as physically disconnected vertical arrangements, in which all framework segments running from tangible gadgets to applications are firmly coupled for the prerequisites of each explicit venture. The productivity and versatility of such administration conveyance are naturally constrained, presenting noteworthy difficulties to IoT arrangement developers. In this context, we propose a novel SaaS structure that gives basic stage administrations to IoT arrangement suppliers to productively convey and constantly expand their administrations for DIY applications over HTTP with no investment required. This paper initially presents the IoT SaaS engineering, on which IoT arrangements can be conveyed as virtual verticals by utilizing figuring assets and middleware benefits on free cloud services. At that point we present the itemized instrument, usage of area intervention, which helps arrangement suppliers to productively give area explicit control applications by designing their own SaaS for IoT. The proposed methodologies are exhibited through the implementation of a sample experiment for building the need. A prototype proposed method is discussed in this paper.

Keywords

IoT SaaS DIY HTTP Multi-layer architecture 

References

  1. 1.
    Polyviou A, Pouloudi N, Rizou S (2014) Which factors affect software-as-a-service selection the most? a study from the customer’s and the vendor’s perspective. 2014 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. Waikoloa, HI, pp 5059–5068Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Haag S, Eckhardt A, Krönung J (2014) From the ground to the cloud – a structured literature analysis of the cloud service landscape around the public and private sector. 2014 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. Waikoloa, HI, pp 2127–2136Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kordy B, Radomirovic S (2012) Constructing optimistic multi-party contract signing protocols. 2012 IEEE 25th computer security foundations symposium. Cambridge, MA, pp 215–229Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Accenture Labs IoT platforms - the engines for agile innovation at scale, 2017. https://www.accenture.com/t20170314T010317Z__w__/us-en/_acnmedia/PDF-47/Accenture-IoT-Platforms-Web.pdf
  5. 5.
    TGF: Impact of the internet of things version 1.0, OASIS Transformational Government Framework TC. https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/53543/TGF-IoT-Impact-v1.0-wd01.doc
  6. 6.
    Hohenstein U, Koka P (2017) Reusable components for adding multi-tenancy to legacy applications. 2017 IEEE 15th international conference on software engineering research, management and applications (SERA). London, pp 187–194Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ojala A, Helander N (2014) Value creation and evolution of a value network: a longitudinal case study on a platform-as-a-service provider. 2014 47th Hawaii international conference on system sciences. Waikoloa, HI, pp 975–984Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Souidi S, Boccio D, Mierzwa S, Aguilar J (2015) The feasibility of using Microsoft Azure infrastructure for a monitoring and evaluation system solution in sub-Saharan Africa. 2015 IEEE global humanitarian technology conference (GHTC). Seattle, WA, pp 226–232Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wu Y, He F, Zhang D, Li X (2018) Service-oriented feature-based data exchange for cloud-based design and manufacturing. In: IEEE Trans. Serv. Comput. 11(2):341–353, 1 March-AprilCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    El-Mougy A, Ibnkahla M, Hegazy L (2015) Software-defined wireless network architectures for the internet-of-things. 2015 IEEE 40th local computer networks conference workshops (LCN workshops), Clearwater Beach, FL, pp 804–811Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wen Y, Zhu X, Rodrigues JJPC, Chen CW (June 2014) Cloud mobile media: reflections and outlook. IEEE Trans. Multimedia 16(4):885–902CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miyachi C (2018) What is “cloud”? It is time to update the NIST definition? IEEE Cloud Comput. 5(3):6–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Flynn D (2015) IoT considerations  — cloud services — IaaS, PaaS, SaaS, build your own, Lattice Research. https://medium.com/lattice-research/iot-considerations-server-side-iaas-paas-saas-1f55afc03185
  14. 14.
    Ryan B, Bona A. Prepare for big changes in software and SaaS pricing, driven by AI and IoT, Gartner, 07 April 2017 ID: G00321363. https://www.gartner.com/doc/3672417/prepare-big-changes-software-saas
  15. 15.
    Ashok A. Five reasons why IoT is not ready for prime time, Forbes Technology Council, Sept 20, 2018, 09:00am. https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2018/09/20/five-reasons-why-iot-is-not-ready-for-prime-time/#7da5c99e78aa
  16. 16.
    FORBES INSIGHTS With Intel IoT, IoT at the edge: how high-performance processing and internet productivity are changing businesses worldwide, Sept 14, 2018, 01:38 pm. https://www.forbes.com/sites/insights-inteliot/2018/09/14/iot-at-the-edge-how-high-performance-processing-and-internet-productivity-are-changing-businesses-worldwide/#4ab5d70a7f1d

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringMaturi Venkata Subba Rao Engineering CollegeHyderabadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringChaitanya Bharathi Institute of TechnologyHyderabadIndia

Personalised recommendations