ARPL: Supporting Adaptive Mixing of RPL Modes to Overcome Memory Overflow

IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) proposed by Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has been adopted to suit Internet of Things (IoT) requirements. However, both the storing and non-storing modes of operation for RPL brings about certain limitations. In case of storing mode of RPL, if an intermediate node along the routing path overflows, new nodes become unreachable whereas, for the non-storing mode of RPL, the entire routing topology is only saved at the root node resulting in increased congestion near the root. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a low overhead Adaptive RPL (ARPL) algorithm which allows flexibility between storing and non-storing modes of operation. Here, the benefits of both the operating modes of RPL are utilized to avoid additional control message exchange, thereby making network resource-aware. We also observe that ARPL performs better than one state-of-the-art competitor in terms of storage and memory overflow by allowing the said flexibility of switching modes. Finally, we simulate ARPL using Cooja in Contiki operating system to evaluate the performance of ARPL. The simulation results show that ARPL achieves higher packet delivery ratio (PDR) in downward communication (e.g. query mode) while keeping convergence time same. It also shows that even in the mixed mode more than 90% nodes are operating in storing mode which improves Point to Point (P2P) communication with reduced traffic near the root thus allowing nodes to save energy.

[1]  Gian Pietro Picco,et al.  RPL, the Routing Standard for the Internet of Things . . . Or Is It? , 2016 .

[2]  Gian Pietro Picco,et al.  D-RPL: Overcoming memory limitations in RPL point-to-multipoint routing , 2015, 2015 IEEE 40th Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN).

[3]  Cong Pu,et al.  Mitigating Forwarding misbehaviors in RPL-based low power and lossy networks , 2018, 2018 15th IEEE Annual Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC).

[4]  JeongGil Ko,et al.  RPL Routing Pathology In a Network With a Mix of Nodes Operating in Storing and Non-Storing Modes , 2014 .

[5]  Rongxing Lu,et al.  A comprehensive study of RPL and P2P-RPL routing protocols: Implementation, challenges and opportunities , 2016, Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications.

[6]  JeongGil Ko,et al.  DualMOP-RPL , 2015, ACM Trans. Sens. Networks.

[7]  Siarhei Kuryla,et al.  RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low power and Lossy Networks , 2010 .

[8]  Carles Gomez,et al.  On the Network Convergence Process in RPL over IEEE 802.15.4 Multihop Networks: Improvement and Trade-Offs , 2014, Sensors.

[9]  Sipra Das Bit,et al.  LoWaNA: low overhead watermark based node authentication in WSN , 2016, Wirel. Networks.

[10]  Kieran Parsons,et al.  Resource Aware Routing Protocol in Heterogeneous Wireless Machine-to-Machine Networks , 2014, GLOBECOM 2014.

[11]  David E. Culler,et al.  An IPv6 Routing Header for Source Routes with the Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) , 2012, RFC.

[12]  Abderrezak Rachedi,et al.  A survey on mobility management protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks based on 6LoWPAN technology , 2016, Comput. Commun..