scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Book ChapterDOI

Performance Evaluation of Source Routing Minimum Cost Forwarding Protocol Over 6TiSCH Applied to the OpenMote-B Platform

TL;DR: Experimental results have shown that the proposed Source Routing Minimum Cost Forwarding protocol is capable of reducing Packet Loss Ratio (PLR) and energy consumption in comparison to the Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL).
Abstract: The aim of this work is the development of Source Routing Minimum Cost Forwarding (SRMCF) protocol over IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e (6TiSCH), evaluating the performance of these protocols for the Internet of Things (IoT), and different healthcare, medical monitoring, and urban mobility applications. To perform this evaluation, this work is making use of the OpenWSN project platform, which implements IEEE 802.15.4e in an open-source environment. The evaluation process is also being done in the most recent version of the OpenMote-B platform. Another goal of this research is to give contribution to the investigation of the applicability of quality of service (QoS) applied to the IEEE 802.15.4e standard. In the present stage of development, the efforts are concentrated on the programming of the required code and the adaptation of the OpenWSN stack. Experimental results have shown that the proposed protocol is capable of reducing Packet Loss Ratio (PLR) and energy consumption in comparison to the Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL). In the next steps the team will also investigate the possibilities to explore long-range routing techniques using the OpenMote platforms, together with xBee, LoraWAN, Raspberry PI, and Arduino platforms.

Summary (2 min read)

1 Introduction

  • By performing this task, these protocols can compute the effects of delay, throughput and energy consumption in communications between a node and the sink.
  • This project is considered in the present work to evaluate SRMCF alongside the most recent version of the OpenMote B platform.

2 Source Routing Minimum Cost Forwarding

  • SRMCF is classified as a reactive protocol, a class of protocols that avoid saving information about network topology in the devices.
  • First, there is the traffic between base station (BS) and sensor nodes (SN), when nodes send acquired information to the sink node and receive information from it.
  • This protocol also supports broadcast messages to perform cost advertisement and cost request.
  • The operation of SRMCF protocol starts with a setup phase, when nodes define their cost to communicate with the BS and the routing table is created.
  • When a node receives a cost value, it compares the received cost with its own cost.

3 OpenWSN Protocol Stack

  • The OpenWSN project is an implementation of the IEEE.802.15.4e standard that allows users to investigate this standard in the context of low-power device-based networks.
  • All these standards and the fact that the project can be easily accessed by researchers make the OpenWSN the perfect tool for implementing and testing algorithms over the IEEE.802.15.4e standard.
  • This layer allows the stack to compress the IPv6 headers.
  • Each node in the network receives a rank that keeps the position of that node in the network.
  • The first is the DAG Information Object (DIO), which is a control message that helps the protocol to build the DAG.

4 Protocol Implementation and Details

  • This section gives details about the process of code development and integration within the OpenWSN stack.
  • This code is composed of functions to deal with messages from upper layers, messages from lower layers, messages from SN to BS, messages from BS to SN, self-messages, control messages, and back-off timer.
  • The OpenWSN stack uses the concept of modules.
  • Considering this characteristic, the functions have been implemented in a source file and a header file was associated to hold prototype functions and variables to be accessed by other modules.
  • This fact creates the need for keeping two versions of the firmware, one to hold the routing algorithm to be applied in the SN, and another to deal with the BS.

5 Testbed and Settings

  • OpenMote is an open-source prototyping platform especially designed for the industrial Internet of Things and it is the latest generation of “Berkeley motes”.
  • These motes features a 32 bit ARM Cortex-M3 microcontroller with a radio transceiver of -97 dBm sensitivity level and + 7 dBm power transmission [4].
  • Next, traffic is generated and recorded in the motes’ network for different test cases.
  • To perform the last test, firmware parameters are adjusted to create two scenarios of evaluation, as suggested in [5], as follows: Scenario 1: Slot frame length = 20 slots, number of active timeslots in slot frames = 14 slots.

6 Preliminary Analysis and Results

  • The network behavior depends on the number of hops.
  • The results in this section considers a maximum of two hops.
  • To perform this first evaluation, one mote received the algorithm for the BS and another mote received the algorithm for the SN.
  • The BS was connected to the host computer.
  • Next, the IPv6 ping was used to verify if the motes were able to receive packets and send responses.

6.1 Test Scenario 1

  • Tables 1 and 2 show PLR for the SRMCF while Tables 3 and 4 show throughput [kb/s] for test scenario 1.
  • One aspect to be considered is how the OpenWSN firmware behaves with different interpacket times, and how results can be analyzed when inter-packet times that are too small.
  • For this test scenario, it can be observed that PLR is smaller for SRMCF in comparison with RPL.
  • Also, higher PLR can be caused by mote queue overflow, since this queue has a limit, in this version of the stack.

6.2 Test Scenario 2

  • This test scenario considers hop distances 1 and 2 with payload sizes of 30 bytes and 300 ms of inter-packet time.
  • Tables 5 and 6 show the PLR while Tables 7 and 8 show the throughput [kb/s] for the SRMCF and RPL protocols in this test scenario.
  • The analysis of the results presented on Tables 5 and 6 show that SRMCF and PRL present the same values of PLR for one hop.
  • For distances of two hopes SRMCF presents a slightly better performance.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

This work has been partially supported and funded by COST CA 15104, UID/EEA/500008/2013, CONQUEST
(CMU/ECE/0030/2017) and ORCIP. The authors acknowledge the fruitful discussions with Fardin Derogarian
and Dragan Vasiljevic.
Performance Evaluation of Source Routing Minimum
Cost Forwarding Protocol over 6TiSCH Applied to the
OpenMote-B Platform
Anderson Rocha Ramos
1
, Fernando J. Velez
1
and Gordana Gardašević
2
1
Instituto das Telecomunicações and Universidade da Beira Interior, DEM, Faculdade de En-
genharia, 6201-001 Covilhã, Portugal
2
Faculty of Electrical Engineering, University of Banja Luka, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herze-
govina
anderson.ramos@ubi.pt, fjv@ubi.pt,
gordana.gardasevic@etf.unibl.org
Abstract. The aim of this work is the development of Source Routing Minimum
Cost Forwarding (SRMCF) protocol over IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE
802.15.4e (6TiSCH), evaluating the performance of these protocols for the In-
ternet of Things (IoT), and different healthcare, medical monitoring and urban
mobility applications. To perform this evaluation, this work is making use of
the OpenWSN project platform, which implements IEEE 802.15.4e in an open
source environment. The evaluation process is also being done in the most re-
cent version of the OpenMote-B platform. Another goal of this research is to
give contribution to the investigation of the applicability of quality of service
(QoS) applied to the IEEE 802.15.4e standard. In the present stage of develop-
ment, the efforts are concentrated on the programming of the required code, and
the adaptation of the OpenWSN stack. Experimental results have shown that
the proposed protocol is capable of reducing Packet Loss Ratio (PLR) and en-
ergy consumption in comparison to the Routing Protocol for Low Power and
Lossy Networks (RPL). In the next steps the team will also investigate the pos-
sibilities to explore long range routing techniques using the OpenMote plat-
forms, together with xBee, LoraWAN, Raspberry PI and Arduino platforms.
Keywords: IEEE 802.15.4e, Minimum Cost Forwarding, Sensor Network,
6TiSCH.
1 Introduction
This work intends to implement SRMCF protocol over 6TiSCH and evaluating its per-
formance by using the OpenMote B platforms [http://www.openmote.com/]. It is based
on the results of a short-term scientific mission (STSM) from COST CA 15104
IRACON during 2017 that took place at University of Banja Luka as a joint activity
with researchers from University of Beira Interior (UBI).

2
A routing protocol is needed to establish end-to-end data delivery. Recent researches
have addressed the development of energy efficient protocols with the aim of finding
routes in the networks that minimize energy consumption in nodes with small energy
resources [1]. SRMCF is an extension of Minimum Cost Forwarding protocols (MCF)
and it is proposed to reduce energy consumption and PLR expending the lifetime of
devices in a Wireless Sensor Network (WSN).
The main idea behind MCF is to find the path with minimum cost in a large sensor
network [2]. By performing this task, these protocols can compute the effects of delay,
throughput and energy consumption in communications between a node and the sink.
The operation of MCF protocols usually comprises two phases [3]. The first phase con-
sists of setting up the cost values to all nodes by broadcasting a message from the sink
node, which allows other nodes to adjust their costs according to the received messaged.
Next, the source will broadcast the intended message to its neighbors and the nodes that
receive the message add their transmission costs. Finally, the node checks the cost in
the packet and if the remaining cost is not sufficient to reach the destination, the packet
is dropped. Nowadays, WSNs are applied in a variety of scenarios including healthcare,
medical monitoring with the so-called wireless body sensor networks (WBSNs) or
Medical BANs [1], and urban mobility applications.
Low-power WSNs use a radio transmission technology based on the IEEE.802.15.4-
2006 standard, which defines a physical layer and a MAC layer to control the access to
wireless medium. The fundamental principle of this standard has in it an intrinsic flaw
because it requires wireless devices to keep listening, since they do not know when
their neighbors will transmit a message. The IEEE.802.15.4e standard tries to deal with
this flaw by altering the MAC protocol while preserving the physical layer [4]. The
latter standard implements a schedule that tells the devices in the network when they
should transmit, receive or go to sleep.
Power consumption in sensor nodes is mainly due to the presence of a radio trans-
ceiver which plays a decisive role as IoT devices become increasingly more present in
everyday applications. Also, recent advances in the production and miniaturization of
electronic circuits are causing an increase on the deployment of WSNs.
The OpenWSN project implements the IEEE.802.15.4e Time Slotted Channel Hop-
ping (TSCH) protocol [5] and allows the use of IPv6 communication. This project is
considered in the present work to evaluate SRMCF alongside the most recent version
of the OpenMote B platform.
The rest of the paper is structured as follows. Section II gives an overview of SRMCF
while the OpenWSN stack is analyzed in section III. Section IV addresses the process
of development and integration of the proposed protocol with the OpenWSN stack.
Section V describes the OpenMote platforms and parameters settings. Section VI pre-
sents the preliminary results. Finally, section VII draws conclusions and discusses the
possibilities for future work.

3
2 Source Routing Minimum Cost Forwarding
SRMCF is classified as a reactive protocol, a class of protocols that avoid saving infor-
mation about network topology in the devices. One example of these protocols is the
Gossiping algorithm [6], in which messages forwarded from nodes are sent with some
probability, to avoid overhead. In general, in reactive protocols there are two types of
information traffic. First, there is the traffic between base station (BS) and sensor nodes
(SN), when nodes send acquired information to the sink node and receive information
from it. Next, there is traffic between sensor node, when these nodes get information
data, topology, connections etc.
In SRMCF protocols, sensor nodes use the MCF protocol to send packets to the base
node. However, in this protocol the SN needs to keep information about minimum cost
path. The idea of SRMFC is that packets generated at the BS contain information about
the path, so that SN can use the path information present in the header to route packets,
such as in Dynamic Source Routing Protocol (DSR) [7]. The BS is required to have a
routing table containing path information that is sent from itself to SN [8] by adding
this information to the headers of the packets that are sent in unicast messages.
As a consequence of the SRMCF topology, packets coming from the BS and packets
coming from SN have different routing algorithms and also different packet headers.
Intermediate nodes are required to identify the appropriate routing scheme based on the
type of the message [9]. Data transmission always uses unicast messages. This protocol
also supports broadcast messages to perform cost advertisement and cost request. Cost
advertisement is generated when BS starts up or when a SN acquires a new cost value,
while all SN can broadcast cost request messages [6].
The operation of SRMCF protocol starts with a setup phase, when nodes define their
cost to communicate with the BS and the routing table is created. The first part is similar
to minimum cost forwarding back-off algorithm, where each node sets its own initial
cost as and the cost to communicate with the BS is equal to 0 [3]. When a node
receives a cost value, it compares the received cost with its own cost. If the received
value is larger than its own value, the current node value is updated with the new value,
which is then broadcasted. This process is executed until all nodes can set up their val-
ues to the minimum.
Every time a node needs to change its initial value, in the previous first phase, it
sends a packet with its ID and addresses it to a near-node. This node adds its own ad-
dress to the payload and sends this payload to the next node, until the message finally
reaches the BS that will now be able to identify all the nodes in the minimum cost path
by their IDs and store this information. Fig. 1 shows the described setup phase.
The protocol developed during the STSM that inspired the present work is also ca-
pable of performing link failure recover. To performer this task, the algorithm keeps a
watchdog timer in which each node monitors the activity of its near-node.

4
Fig. 1. Network setup phase in SRMCF protocols.
If a node does not respond during the requested time, its near node begins to broadcast
cost request messages, so that the network can reestablish the routing information.
3 OpenWSN Protocol Stack
The OpenWSN project is an implementation of the IEEE.802.15.4e standard that allows
users to investigate this standard in the context of low-power device-based networks. It
is also heavily based on the concept of IoT, which means that it brings several IoT based
standards, such as Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL), Con-
straint Application Protocol (CoAP) and IPV6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area
Network (6LoWPAN). All these standards and the fact that the project can be easily
accessed by researchers make the OpenWSN the perfect tool for implementing and
testing algorithms over the IEEE.802.15.4e standard. The structure of the OpenWSN
stack is illustrated in Fig. 2.
The MAC sub-layer of the stack uses IEEE.802.15.4e TSCH. While this implemen-
tation preserves some characteristics of the IEEE.802.15.4 standard, such as Carrier
Sense Multiple Access Collision Avoidance (CSMA/CA), which uses the concept of
self-interference cancellation to detect collisions [10]. It also brings great improve-
ments, such as the use of channel hopping, which allows persistent multi-path fading
and increases interferences immunity [5]. The stack also brings the uRES protocol im-
plemented in it. uRES is used to ensure that nodes can agree in message exchange that
occurs in two-way communications, since the IEEE.802.15.4e standard by itself has no
means to allow efficient data transport over multi-hop paths [5]. This part of the stack
may be regarded as a Logical Link Control (LLC) layer. Also, there is a schedule mech-
anism implemented to allow nodes to identify actions to be taken based on the slots of
the frame in which time is sliced in the IEEE.802.15.4e standard.

5
Fig. 2. OpenWSN protocol stack [11].
In the next layer, the stack implements 6LoWPAN as adaptation layer [12]. This layer
allows the stack to compress the IPv6 headers. This procedure ensures that frames from
the IEEE.802.15.4e standard have a length of 127 bytes, at most, and reduces the vol-
ume of information required for transmission [11]. Basically, the underling idea is to
remove information that is not crucial from the headers while compressing other infor-
mation, such as source and destination address. The stack also has a mechanism called
Low-Power Border Router (LBR) which inflates the headers back to the standard size
of the IPv6 headers [13].
RPL is implemented in the next level. It is responsible for the routing topology of
the stack. This protocol is designed by the IETF ROLL working group and is especially
developed to work with low-power networks. RPL uses the concept of Direct Acyclic
Graph (DAG), where a node acts as the root of the topology [14]. Each node in the
network receives a rank that keeps the position of that node in the network. These ranks
increase in the downward direction. There are two types of messages within this con-
cept. The first is the DAG Information Object (DIO), which is a control message that
helps the protocol to build the DAG. The next message type is the Destination Adver-
tisement Object (DAO), which is a unicast control message from nodes to its parents
that allows intermediate nodes to recover information about the reverse path of the
packet [15].
Finally, the OpenWSN stack implements CoAP [16]. This protocol is constructed as
a header which is placed upon the User Datagram Protocol (UDP) and allows the im-
plementation of applications that can be uploaded to motes to explore several features
of hardware and software.

Citations
More filters
Proceedings ArticleDOI
01 Sep 2019
TL;DR: Experimental results have shown that the proposed Source Routing Minimum Cost Forwarding protocol is capable of reducing PLR and energy consumption in comparison to the Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL).
Abstract: This paper presents the recent results obtained from the work that have been carried out with the aim of implementing Source Routing Minimum Cost Forwarding (SRMCF) protocol over IPv6 and the TSCH mode of IEEE 802.15.4e (6TiSCH), evaluating the performance of these protocols for the Internet of Things (IoT) and for different applications in healthcare, medical monitoring and urban mobility. To perform the new experiments presented here, this work is making use of the OpenWSN project platform, which implements IEEE 802.15.4e in an open source environment. The evaluation process considers the most recent version of the OpenMote-B platform, by considering higher numbers of hop distances and different parameters, such as Packet Loss Ratio (PLR), throughput and Round Trip Time (RTT). Another goal of this work is to investigate the service quality of the IEEE 802.15.4e standard. The research efforts focus on the code programming, and the adaptation of the OpenWSN stack. Experimental results have shown that the proposed protocol is capable of reducing PLR and energy consumption in comparison to the Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL). For a number hops lower than four hops, the RTT is shorter when the SRMCF protocol is applied.

Cites result from "Performance Evaluation of Source Ro..."

  • ...It analyses recent results obtained on the new phase of development of the work from [1], expanding the test case scenarios to evaluate performance with higher hop distances and comparing performance results with RPL....

    [...]

Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 2022
TL;DR: In this article , the authors present various routing techniques used in WSN that cover the brief overview of flat routing, hierarchical routing, location-based routing and bio-inspired routing techniques such as Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) and Artificial Bee Colony Optimisation (ABC) algorithms.
Abstract: Wireless sensor network (WSN) plays a significant role in various commercial, industrial and agriculture sector in wide ranges of applications. Routing is necessary to maintain the reliable communication between different nodes, cluster heads, and base station; however, performance of routing mechanism is challenging due to network lifetime, dynamic nodes, higher packet drop, scalability issue, limited adaptability and environmental conditions. This paper presents various routing techniques used in WSN that covers the brief overview of flat routing, hierarchical routing, location-based routing and bio-inspired routing techniques such as Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) and Artificial Bee Colony Optimization (ABC) algorithms. It focuses on the routing mechanism, routing scenario, mobility, scalability, energy consumption, data aggregation, performance evaluation metrics, challenges and constraints of the routing in WSN. This comprehensive survey provides the future direction for the improvement in routing mechanisms in WSN.
References
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
01 May 2005
TL;DR: The three main categories explored in this paper are data-centric, hierarchical and location-based; each routing protocol is described and discussed under the appropriate category.
Abstract: Recent advances in wireless sensor networks have led to many new protocols specifically designed for sensor networks where energy awareness is an essential consideration. Most of the attention, however, has been given to the routing protocols since they might differ depending on the application and network architecture. This paper surveys recent routing protocols for sensor networks and presents a classification for the various approaches pursued. The three main categories explored in this paper are data-centric, hierarchical and location-based. Each routing protocol is described and discussed under the appropriate category. Moreover, protocols using contemporary methodologies such as network flow and quality of service modeling are also discussed. The paper concludes with open research issues. � 2003 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

3,573 citations

ReportDOI
01 Mar 2012
TL;DR: This document specifies the IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPL), which provides a mechanism whereby multipoint-to-point traffic from devices inside the LLN towards a central control point as well as point- to- multipoint traffic from the central control points to the devices insideThe LLN are supported.
Abstract: Low-Power and Lossy Networks (LLNs) are a class of network in which both the routers and their interconnect are constrained. LLN routers typically operate with constraints on processing power, memory, and energy (battery power). Their interconnects are characterized by high loss rates, low data rates, and instability. LLNs are comprised of anything from a few dozen to thousands of routers. Supported traffic flows include point-to-point (between devices inside the LLN), point- to-multipoint (from a central control point to a subset of devices inside the LLN), and multipoint-to-point (from devices inside the LLN towards a central control point). This document specifies the IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPL), which provides a mechanism whereby multipoint-to-point traffic from devices inside the LLN towards a central control point as well as point-to- multipoint traffic from the central control point to the devices inside the LLN are supported. Support for point-to-point traffic is also available. [STANDARDS-TRACK]

2,551 citations


"Performance Evaluation of Source Ro..." refers methods in this paper

  • ...The stack also has a mechanism called Low-Power Border Router (LBR) which inflates the headers back to the standard size of the IPv6 headers [13]....

    [...]

ReportDOI
01 Jun 2014
TL;DR: The Constrained Application Protocol is a specialized web transfer protocol for use with constrained nodes and constrained networks, designed for machine- to-machine (M2M) applications such as smart energy and building automation.
Abstract: The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) is a specialized web transfer protocol for use with constrained nodes and constrained (e.g., low-power, lossy) networks. The nodes often have 8-bit microcontrollers with small amounts of ROM and RAM, while constrained networks such as IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs) often have high packet error rates and a typical throughput of 10s of kbit/s. The protocol is designed for machine- to-machine (M2M) applications such as smart energy and building automation. CoAP provides a request/response interaction model between application endpoints, supports built-in discovery of services and resources, and includes key concepts of the Web such as URIs and Internet media types. CoAP is designed to easily interface with HTTP for integration with the Web while meeting specialized requirements such as multicast support, very low overhead, and simplicity for constrained environments.

2,412 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
15 Oct 2001
TL;DR: This work presents a novel backoff-based cost field setup algorithm that finds the optimal costs of all nodes to the sink with one single message overhead at each node in a large sensor network.
Abstract: Wireless sensor networks offer a wide range of challenges to networking research, including unconstrained network scale, limited computing, memory and energy resources, and wireless channel errors. We study the problem of delivering messages from any sensor to an interested client user along the minimum-cost path in a large sensor network. We propose a new cost field based approach to minimum cost forwarding. In the design, we present a novel backoff-based cost field setup algorithm that finds the optimal costs of all nodes to the sink with one single message overhead at each node. Once the field is established, the message, carrying dynamic cost information, flows along the minimum cost path in the cost field. Each intermediate node forwards the message only if it finds itself to be on the optimal path, based on dynamic cost states. Our design does not require an intermediate node to maintain explicit "forwarding path" states. It requires a few simple operations and scales to any network size. We show the correctness and effectiveness of the design by both simulations and analysis.

475 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
03 Mar 2008
TL;DR: MiXiM as mentioned in this paper joins and extends several existing simulation frameworks developed for wireless and mobile simulations in OMNeT++, providing detailed models of the wireless channel, wireless connectivity, mobility models, models for obstacles and many communication protocols especially at the medium access control (MAC) level.
Abstract: Wireless communication has attracted considerable interest in the research community, and many wireless networks are evaluated using discrete event simulators like OMNeT++. Although OMNeT++ provides a powerful and clear simulation framework, it lacks of direct support and a concise modeling chain for wireless communication. Both is provided by MiXiM. MiXiM joins and extends several existing simulation frameworks developed for wireless and mobile simulations in OMNeT++. It provides detailed models of the wireless channel (fading, etc.), wireless connectivity, mobility models, models for obstacles and many communication protocols especially at the Medium Access Control (MAC) level. Further, it provides a user-friendly graphical representation of wireless and mobile networks in OMNeT++, supporting debugging and defining even complex wireless scenarios. Though still in development, MiXiM already is a powerful tool for performance analysis of wireless networks. Its extensive functionality and clear concept may motivate researches to contribute to this open-source project [4].

372 citations

Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Q1. What are the contributions mentioned in the paper "Performance evaluation of source routing minimum cost forwarding protocol over 6tisch applied to the openmote-b platform" ?

The aim of this work is the development of Source Routing Minimum Cost Forwarding ( SRMCF ) protocol over IPv6 over the TSCH mode of IEEE 802. To perform this evaluation, this work is making use of the OpenWSN project platform, which implements IEEE 802. Another goal of this research is to give contribution to the investigation of the applicability of quality of service ( QoS ) applied to the IEEE 802. 

Another feature that can be explored in future work is the development of QoS upon the proposed stack by performing the necessary changes in the algorithm. The team will also make use of the developed protocol to explore long range communications. 

Trending Questions (1)
What are the main features of OpenMote B?

The main features of OpenMote B include two radio transceivers operating at 2.4 GHz and sub-GHz frequency bands.