Performance analysis of IoT protocol under different mobility models

Abstract Internet of Things [IoT] is a network that encompasses sensors, actuators and networking devices for the purpose of communication and control. The IoT devices are resource-constrained which require a specialized routing protocol in order to transmit the sensed data from source to destination efficiently. The IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low power and Lossy network (RPL) is one of the widely used routing protocols in IoT networks. The performance of RPL protocol is evaluated on the three different mobility models; Manhattan Grid (MG), Gaussian Markov (GM) and Random Waypoint (RW) at different scalability levels in Contiki based Cooja simulator. The standard Quality of Service (QoS) parameters; Packet Delivery Ration (PDR), Average Power (Pavg) and Hop Count (HC) are considered for analysis. The extensive experimental analysis of RPL when exposed to different mobility model and scalability reveals that, the Manhattan Grid model provides better QoS performance by preserving the working nature of RPL optimally.

[1]  Lillian L. Dai,et al.  RPL under mobility , 2012, 2012 IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC).

[2]  Ahmed Yassin Al-Dubai,et al.  Performance Evaluation of the RPL Protocol in Fixed and Mobile Sink Low-Power and Lossy-Networks , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing and Communications; Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing; Pervasive Intelligence and Computing.

[3]  Gunasekaran Manogaran,et al.  A Gaussian process based big data processing framework in cluster computing environment , 2017, Cluster Computing.

[4]  C. Sathitwiriyawong,et al.  A Comparative Study of Random Waypoint and Gauss-Markov Mobility Models in the Performance Evaluation of MANET , 2006, 2006 International Symposium on Communications and Information Technologies.

[5]  N. Bhalaji,et al.  Analysis of Routing Protocol for Low-power and Lossy Networks in IoT Real Time Applications , 2016 .

[6]  João Henrique Kleinschmidt,et al.  Performance evaluation of RPL on a mobile scenario with different ContikiMAC radio duty cycles , 2017, 2017 IEEE 18th International Conference on High Performance Switching and Routing (HPSR).

[7]  Charles E. Perkins,et al.  Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing , 2001, RFC.

[8]  Julien Montavont,et al.  Analysis and performance evaluation of RPL under mobility , 2014, 2014 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC).

[9]  Riri Fitri Sari,et al.  Performance evaluation of the manhattan mobility model in vehicular ad-hoc networks for high mobility vehicle , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Communication, Networks and Satellite (COMNETSAT).

[10]  Fabrice Theoleyre,et al.  Using multiparent routing in RPL to increase the stability and the lifetime of the network , 2015, Ad Hoc Networks.

[11]  Antonio J. Jara,et al.  RPL-based networks in static and mobile environment: A performance assessment analysis , 2017, J. King Saud Univ. Comput. Inf. Sci..

[12]  Jean-Philippe Vasseur,et al.  A performance evaluation study of RPL: Routing Protocol for Low power and Lossy Networks , 2010, 2010 44th Annual Conference on Information Sciences and Systems (CISS).

[13]  Laura Marie Feeney,et al.  An Energy Consumption Model for Performance Analysis of Routing Protocols for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks , 2001, Mob. Networks Appl..

[14]  Jalel Ben-Othman,et al.  Detecting Greedy Behaviors by Linear Regression in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks , 2009, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Communications.