Low Overhead Scheduling of LoRa Transmissions for Improved Scalability

Recently, LoRaWAN has attracted much attention for the realization of many Internet of Things applications because it offers low-power, long-distance, and low-cost wireless communication. Recent works have shown that the LoRaWAN specification for class A devices comes with scalability limitations due to the ALOHA-like nature of the MAC layer. In this paper, we propose a synchronization and scheduling mechanism for LoRaWAN networks consisting of class A devices. The mechanism runs on top of the LoRaWAN MAC layer. A central network synchronization and scheduling entity will schedule uplink and downlink transmissions. In order to reduce the synchronization packet length, all time slots that are being assigned to an end node are encoded in a probabilistic space-efficient data structure. An end node will check if a time slot is part of the received data structure in order to determine when to transmit. Time slots are assigned based on the traffic needs of the end nodes. We show that in case of a nonsaturated multichannel LoRaWAN network with synchronization being done in a separate channel, the packet delivery ratio (PDR) is easily 7% (for SF7) to 30% (for SF12) higher than in an unsynchronized LoRaWAN network. For saturated networks, the differences in PDR become more profound as nodes are only scheduled as long as they can be accommodated given the remaining capacity of the network. The synchronization process will use less than 3-mAh extra battery capacity per end node during a one year period, for synchronization periods longer than three days. This is less than the battery capacity used to transmit packets that are going to be lost in an unsynchronized network due to collisions.

[1]  Burton H. Bloom,et al.  Space/time trade-offs in hash coding with allowable errors , 1970, CACM.

[2]  Harald Niederreiter,et al.  Probability and computing: randomized algorithms and probabilistic analysis , 2006, Math. Comput..

[3]  Michael Mitzenmacher,et al.  Less Hashing, Same Performance: Building a Better Bloom Filter , 2006, ESA.

[4]  Thomas H. Clausen,et al.  A Study of LoRa: Long Range & Low Power Networks for the Internet of Things , 2016, Sensors.

[5]  Konstantin Mikhaylov,et al.  Analysis of Capacity and Scalability of the LoRa Low Power Wide Area Network Technology , 2016 .

[6]  Orestis Georgiou,et al.  Low Power Wide Area Network Analysis: Can LoRa Scale? , 2016, IEEE Wireless Communications Letters.

[7]  Thomas Watteyne,et al.  Understanding the Limits of LoRaWAN , 2016, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[8]  Francesca Cuomo,et al.  EXPLoRa: Extending the performance of LoRa by suitable spreading factor allocations , 2017, 2017 IEEE 13th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob).

[9]  Mikael Gidlund,et al.  Using LoRa for industrial wireless networks , 2017, 2017 IEEE 13th International Workshop on Factory Communication Systems (WFCS).

[10]  Sofie Pollin,et al.  Power and spreading factor control in low power wide area networks , 2017, 2017 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC).

[11]  Ingrid Moerman,et al.  LoRa Scalability: A Simulation Model Based on Interference Measurements , 2017, Sensors.

[12]  Dmitry Bankov,et al.  Mathematical model of LoRaWAN channel access , 2017, 2017 IEEE 18th International Symposium on A World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks (WoWMoM).

[13]  Utz Roedig,et al.  Mitigating Inter-network Interference in LoRa Networks , 2016, EWSN.

[14]  Ingrid Moerman,et al.  Scalability Analysis of Large-Scale LoRaWAN Networks in ns-3 , 2017, IEEE Internet of Things Journal.

[15]  Dirk Pesch,et al.  A Fair Adaptive Data Rate Algorithm for LoRaWAN , 2018, EWSN.

[16]  Mario Di Francesco,et al.  Adaptive configuration of lora networks for dense IoT deployments , 2018, NOMS 2018 - 2018 IEEE/IFIP Network Operations and Management Symposium.

[17]  Maria Alexa Nguyen-Cruz.  Weightless , 2019, The Vernal Pool.