Design trade-offs for the wireless management networks of constrained device testbeds

A relatively small number of testbeds based on constrained devices use a wireless management network, mostly because of the unreliable communication it enables. However, in some cases, such management networks are the only option due to the target location of such testbeds: outdoors, on light posts, buildings, etc. In this paper, we analyze the design trade-offs encountered when designing a wireless management network for testbeds based on constrained devices. First, we identify two use cases and the functionality needed by the management network in supporting them. Next, we discuss ways of providing the desired functionality and illustrate the decisions we took for designing and implementing the management network for the extension of the LOG-a-TEC testbed together with an initial evaluation. The analysis and the adopted decisions resulted in a management network that is separated from the experimental network providing improved application throughput, together with smaller application level updates/reconfiguration size that significantly shorten the time required to set up a new experiment.

[1]  Philip Levis,et al.  Maté: a tiny virtual machine for sensor networks , 2002, ASPLOS X.

[2]  David E. Culler,et al.  Taming the underlying challenges of reliable multihop routing in sensor networks , 2003, SenSys '03.

[3]  Alexander Gluhak,et al.  A survey on facilities for experimental internet of things research , 2011, IEEE Communications Magazine.

[4]  Qi Han,et al.  A Two-Stage Bootloader to Support Multi-application Deployment and Switching in Wireless Sensor Networks , 2009, 2009 International Conference on Computational Science and Engineering.

[5]  R.N. Murty,et al.  CitySense: An Urban-Scale Wireless Sensor Network and Testbed , 2008, 2008 IEEE Conference on Technologies for Homeland Security.

[6]  Stefan Bouckaert,et al.  The w-iLab.t Testbed , 2010, TRIDENTCOM.

[7]  Ioannis Chatzigiannakis,et al.  WISEBED: An Open Large-Scale Wireless Sensor Network Testbed , 2009, SENSAPPEAL.

[8]  Andreas Willig,et al.  TWIST: a scalable and reconfigurable testbed for wireless indoor experiments with sensor networks , 2006, REALMAN '06.

[9]  Evangelos Theodoridis,et al.  SmartSantander: IoT experimentation over a smart city testbed , 2014, Comput. Networks.

[10]  Carolina Fortuna,et al.  Low-Cost Testbed Development and Its Applications in Cognitive Radio Prototyping , 2015 .

[11]  David E. Culler,et al.  Incremental network programming for wireless sensors , 2004, SECON.

[12]  Manik Gupta,et al.  Towards the Design of a Component-based Context-Aware Framework for Wireless Sensor Networks , 2012 .

[13]  Matt Welsh,et al.  CitySense : The Design and Performance of an Urban Wireless Sensor Network Testbed , 2009 .

[14]  Frank Eliassen,et al.  Optimizing sensor network reprogramming via in situ reconfigurable components , 2013, TOSN.

[15]  Anis Koubaa,et al.  Radio link quality estimation in wireless sensor networks , 2012, ACM Trans. Sens. Networks.

[16]  David M Levinson,et al.  Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering , 2009, Complex.

[17]  Cormac J. Sreenan,et al.  Software Update Recovery for Wireless Sensor Networks , 2009, SENSAPPEAL.

[18]  Matt Welsh,et al.  MoteLab: a wireless sensor network testbed , 2005, IPSN '05.

[19]  Yunhao Liu,et al.  Dynamic linking and loading in networked embedded systems , 2009, 2009 IEEE 6th International Conference on Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Systems.

[20]  Adam Dunkels,et al.  Run-time dynamic linking for reprogramming wireless sensor networks , 2006, SenSys '06.