IOE MODULE 5.pptx

MODULE 5: MOBILITY AND
SETTINGS
CO4. Analysis and evaluate protocols
used in IOT.
CO5. Design and develop smart city in
IOT.

CONTENTS
• Introduction
• Localization
• Mobility management
• Localization and handover management
• Technology considerations
• Performance evaluation
• Simulation setup
• Performance results
• Identification of IOT (data formats. IPV6,
identifiers and locators, tag etc.)

INTRODUCTION
• The significance of location awareness and the
requirement for fast adaptation to frequent location
changes due to mobility are critical issues that need to
be addressed for the success of future ubiquitous and
mobile networks.
• Location information is important for enabling
location-based services (LBS) in commercial,
healthcare, public safety, and military domains.
• Location awareness can be utilized for improving or
enhancing network functionalities, such as mobility
management for quality of service provisioning.

INTRODUCTION
• Localization and mobility management are
two concepts that are tightly inter-connected.
• The need to determine the unknown location
of an entity stems from the mobility capability
of this entity.
• On the other hand, managing the issues raised
due to mobility can be alleviated by the
provision of location-related information.

INTRODUCTION
• While determining the location of objects in
outdoor environments has been extensively
studied and addressed with technologies such
as GPS (global positioning system).
• The localization problem for indoor radio
propagation environments is recognized to be
very challenging. This is mainly due to the
presence of severe multipath and shadow
fading

INTRODUCTION
• For mobility support over IP networks, mobile
IP (MIP) is the most well-known protocol
proposed by the Internet Engineering Task
Force (IETF).
• But, latency delays and losses in IP traffic due
to the time needed to perform the handover
process are its main limitations.

LOCALIZATION
• The localization problem is defined as the process of
determining the current position of a mobile node or
an object within a specific region, indoor or outdoor.
• The position can be expressed in several ways,
depending on the application requirements or the
positioning system specifications.
• For instance, absolute coordinates, relative or symbolic
locations are possible formats.
• Location information is important for enabling LBS in
commercial, healthcare, public safety and military
domains. Furthermore, location awareness can be
utilized for improving or enhancing network
functionalities, such as mobility management for
quality of service provisioning.

LOCALIZATION
• Localization using radio signals has attracted considerable attention
in the fields of telecommunications and navigation.
• The most well-known positioning system is the GPS, which is
satellite-based and is successful for tracking users in outdoor
environments.
• The inability of satellite signals to penetrate buildings can cause the
complete failure of GPS in indoor environments.
• For indoor location sensing, a number of wireless technologies have
been proposed, such as infrared, ultrasound , WiFi and ultra-wide
band.
• However, the indoor radio propagation channel is characterized as
site specific, exhibiting severe multipath effects and low probability
of line-of-sight signal propagation between the transmitter and
receiver, making accurate indoor positioning very challenging.

LOCALIZATION
• Localization techniques, in general, utilize
metrics of the received radio signals (RRS).
• The most traditional received signal metrics
are based on angle of arrival (AOA), time of
arrival (TOA), time difference of arrival (TDOA)
measurements or RSS measurements from
several reference points.

General framework of RRS-based
positioning

General framework of RRS-based
positioning
• The general framework of an RSS-based positioning system
is illustrated in Figure.
• Radio signals transmitted by the fixed reference points
(such as access points or base stations) and
sensed/measured by the RRS-sensing devices of the
receiver.
• They are converted into location-related signal metrics,
such as TOA, TDOA, AOA and RSS.
• The reported signal metrics are then processed by the
positioning algorithm for estimating the unknown location
of the receiver, which is finally utilized by the application.
• The accuracy of the signal metrics and the complexity of
the positioning algorithm define the accuracy of the
estimated location.

• Depending on how the signal metrics are
utilized by the positioning algorithm, we can
identify three major families of localization
techniques
– Triangulation
– Scene analysis
– Proximity

Triangulation
• Triangulation methods are based on the
geometric properties of a triangle to estimate
the receiver’s location.
• Depending on the type of radio signal
measurements, they can be further
subdivided into
– Multilateration method
– angulation method

Multilateration positioning technique

Multilateration positioning technique
• In multilateration techniques, TOA, TDOA or RSS
measurements from multiple reference points are
converted into distance estimations with the help of a radio
propagation model.
• Examples of such positioning systems include GPS , the
cricket location system , and the SpotON ad hoc location.
• Models for indoor localization applications must, however,
account for the effects of harsh indoor wireless channel
behavior on the characteristics of the metrics at the
receiving side.
• These characteristics affect indoor localization applications
in ways that are very different from how they affect indoor
telecommunication applications.

Angulation positioning technique

Angulation positioning technique
• In angulation techniques, AOA measurements
with the help of specific antenna designs or
hardware equipment are used for inferring the
receiver’s position.
• The Ubisense [UBI] is an example of an AOA
based location sensing system.
• The increased complexity and the hardware
requirement are the main hindrances of such
systems.

Scene analysis
• Scene analysis or fingerprinting methods require an
offline phase for learning the radio characteristics in a
specific area under study.
• This signal information is then stored in a database
called Radio Map.
• During the online localization phase, the receiver’s
unknown location is inferred based on the similarity
between the Radio Map entries and real-time signal
measurements.
• The similarity in signal space can be based either on
pattern-matching techniques (deterministic schemes)
or on probability distributions (probabilistic schemes).

Scene analysis positioning technique

Scene analysis positioning technique
• Figure depicts the general mechanism of scene
analysis
• localization.
• RADAR , HORUS , COMPASS and WIFE are
fingerprinting localization approaches.
• The main limitation and weakness of scene
analysis methods is due to the frequent
environmental changes that cause inconsistency
of signal behavior between the training phase
and time of the actual location determination
phase.

Proximity
• Proximity methods are based on the detection
of objects with a known location.
• This can be done with the aid of sensors, such
as Touch MOUSE or based on topology and
connectivity information, such as in the active
badge location system , or finally with the aid
of an automatic identification system, such as
the credit card point of cell terminals.
• Such techniques are simple but usually suffer
from limited accuracy.

Proximity positioning technique

Mobility management
• Over recent years, we have witnessed an
increasing demand for wireless access to Internet
applications.
• This is due the remarkable success of wireless
networking, mobile computing and the growing
popularity of the Internet.
• Mobility is a requirement not appropriately
addressed by the Internet Protocol (IP), however,
which was originally designed for static, wired
networks.

Mobility management
• According to the IP, an IP address has two major
functionalities:
– To uniquely identify a particular terminal in the entire network
– For routing the traffic between two endpoints.
• The IP address is indicative of the IP sub network in which
the terminal resides.
• The problem arises when the terminal changes sub
networks due to the mobile node’s mobility.
• A mobile terminal needs to have a stable IP address in
order to be stably identifiable to other network nodes.
• It also needs a temporary IP address for routing purposes.

Mobility management
• The MIP protocol extends IP by allowing a
mobile node to effectively utilize two IP
addresses, one for identification and the other
for routing.
• While the mobile node changes its access
point to the network, handover (or handoff)
management enables the network to maintain
a mobile node’s connection.

Mobility management
• The latency delay during handover causes
interruption of the IP traffic, which may be
prohibitive for real time applications.
• In the following, a more detailed description
of both MIP and handover process is provided.

MIP
• The standardized mobility support in IP networks is MIP, an
IETF communication protocol that is designed to let mobile
nodes move from one network to another while
maintaining a permanent IP address.
• This is done through the interaction of a home agent and a
foreign agent.
• A mobile node is identified by its home address, regardless
of its current point of attachment to the network.
• While situated away from its home, the data packets
flowing from a corresponding node are transparently
routed via the home agent to a care of address that
represents its current location.
• The main issue when transmitting real time traffic is non-
synchronization of the handover process at the link and
network layers.

Link-layer handover
• A Layer 2 (L2) handover occurs because the mobile
node must
• establish a physical connection to a new access point.
• This is because, due to mobility, the RSS from the
mobile node’s current access point may decrease,
causing degradation of their communication.
• Even though several protocols have been proposed for
different wireless access technologies, we focus on the
IEEE 802.11 standard for its popularity and the
availability of numerical results regarding its latency
analysis; it is also the vector of wireless Internet today.

Link-layer handover
• According to its specifications, the handover
process follows three phases;
– the handover initiation
– the handover decision
– The handover execution
• It includes three main steps: discovery,
authentication and association, as illustrated
in Figure

Link-layer handover
• During the discovery phase, the mobile node
searches for an access point with a stronger
RSS to associate with.
• This is accomplished through a medium access
control (MAC) layer function, called scan.
• There are two modes of scanning:
– active
– passive

Link-layer handover
• In the passive mode the mobile node listens
for beacon messages (sent periodically by the
access points), on assigned channels.
• In the active mode, the mobile node sends in
additional PROBE broadcast packets on each
channel and receives probe responses from
access points.

Link-layer handover
• After scanning all channels, the mobile node
selects a target access point and enters the
authentication step, which includes the
transmission of the mobile node’s identity to
the access point and the access point’s
AUTHENTICATION RESPONSE.
• The L2 handover terminates upon the
reception of an ASSOCIATION RESPONSE
message.

Link-layer handover
• The L2 handover latency is mainly due to the
time needed for the discovery phase, since the
mobile node has to wait for PROBE RESPONSE
messages even if no access points are
operating on specific channels.
• According to the results in [MIS 03] the L2
handover latency is between 58.74 ms and
396.76 ms

Network-layer handover
• If a mobile node roams between two access
points of the same subnetwork, no routing
issues occur and its session is not interrupted,
since the mobile node keeps the same IP
address and is already authenticated.
• However, if the access points belong to
different IP subnetworks, the routing
subnetwork prefix changes and thus the IP
(L3) handover follows the L2 handover.

• It includes three stages:
– movement detection
– address configuration
– Binding update.
• The movement detection stage starts after a mobile
node has attached itself to the new network at the
physical and link layer (L2 handover).
• In this stage a mobile node detects that it has moved to
a new network, based on messages broadcasted by the
access routers access routes (ARs) in either a passive or
active mode.

• In the passive case, the access routers ARs are regularly
sending broadcast ROUTER ADVERTISEMENT messages that
contain their identity and their IP addresses.
• In the ACTIVE mode, the mobile node is sending in addition
ROUTER SOLICITATION requests to the ARs regularly in
order to discover new point of attachment to the network.
• The mobile node receives relevant information from the
network that will allow it to configure its new temporary
address, the care of address and other network settings.
• Finally, it sends a BINDING UPDATE to the home agent (HA)
in order to register its care of address with its permanent
address.

• The L3 handover latency is mainly due to the
time needed for the movement detection
phase, which depends on the frequency of the
ROUTER ADVERTISEMENT or ROUTER
SOLICITATION messages.
• Statistically, the longer the time between two
consecutive messages, the longer it takes the
movement detection to be completed.

Movement Detection Process
• Movement detection mechanisms may be broadly divided into
– advertisement based
– hint based.
• The advertisement based method relies on the periodic
broadcasting of AR advertisements that include mobility-related
information.
• CARD (candidate access router discovery) is process where an AR
access router announces its capabilities in broadcast messages.
• In such schemes, there is an inherent trade-off between the
bandwidth wasted by advertisements and the movement detection
performance.
• The higher the rate that periodic advertisements are broadcasted;
the more bandwidth is wasted by these messages.

Movement Detection Process
• Hint-based mechanisms attempt to deal with this
bandwidth wastage by relaying on hints or
triggers from lower layers.
• In fast MIP, it is assumed that at the mobile
node's terminal link layer triggers are sent to the
network layer so that the delay between the L2
handover and L3 handover are better
synchronized.
• By minimizing the L3 movement detection delay,
the mobile node can proactively proceed with its
mobility registration at the network level.

Handover Management
• In Handoff management a mobile device
keeps its connection active when it moves
from one cell to another cell.
• Depending on the broad category, handoffs
may be of two types:
1. Horizontal Handoff (Intra-System Handoff)
2. Vertical Handoff (Inter-System Handoff)

Handover Management
• Horizontal handoff:
– Handoffs in homogeneous networks are referred to as
Horizontal Handoff.
– This type of handoff occurs when the signal strength of the
serving BS goes below a certain threshold value.
– The reason for such handoff could be poor signal strength,
local interference, load balancing.
• Vertical Handoff:
– Inter-System Handoff or vertical handoff between two BSs,
belong to two different systems.
– The reason for such handoff could be poor signal strength,
local interference.

Localization and handover
management relying on RFID

RFID-enabled Localization
• The low cost of passive tags, the non-line-of-site
requirement, the fast reading of multiple tags,
and the relatively reduced sensitivity to user
orientation motivated to explore the potential of
RFID in solving both problems of indoor
localization and mobility management
improvement.
• Positioning schemes relying on RFID can follow
two basic procedures, depending on the type of
the RFID component supported by the target’s
device, i.e. tag or reader.

• IoT service, mobile devices might be:
– Tagged with an RFID tag (e.g. passive);
– Carry RFID reader as with the near-field
communication technology
• Mobile node carrying an RFID reader will be more
expensive than a tag.
• Depending on the IoT service scenario as being
either a massive deployment of RFID tags or RFID
readers surrounding the mobile device.
• Again, deploying RFID readers will be more
expensive than deploying RFID tags (passive).

• If the mobile nodes device is equipped with a tag, a
number of reference readers are placed in the area, any of
the general positioning techniques, i.e. triangulation, scene
analysis or proximity can be employed to estimate the
location of the mobile node.
• Many positioning systems follows this approach.
• If the user’s terminal is equipped with an RFID reader,
passive tags with known coordinates are deployed in the
area as reference tags and their IDs are associated with
their location information.
• For estimating the mobile node’s location, a proximity
technique is followed based on the location information
corresponding to the reference tags detected by the reader
embedded in the mobile node’s device.

• Second type of positioning schemes are easier to
implement, since low-cost passive tags can be
deployed in a large extent in most indoor
environments; such as a smart floor tagged with
RFIDs.
• Additionally, it is anticipated that future mobile
terminals will have a reader extension capability
for gaining access to a wide range of innovative
applications and services supported by RFID
systems.
• There are already cell phones on the market that
are RFID tag reader enabled.

RFID-enabled movement detection
• There will be a massive deployment of reference passive
tags for the purpose of movement detection of a mobile
node whose terminal is reader enabled.
• One possible way for accomplishing this is by associating
the reference tag IDs with network topology information.
• For instance, each tag ID can be matched to its best point of
access according to certain criteria.
• Then, during the mobile node’s mobility, such topology-
related information corresponding to the reference tags ID
retrieved by its reader, can be used for detecting its
movement faster.
• This is because the tags are informing the mobile node
about the access points covering the area, and thus the
mobile node can also anticipate the handover and at the
same time select its next best point of access.

Technology Consideration
• Multiple Tags-to-reader Collisions
• Multiple Readers-to-tag Collision
• Reader-to-reader Collision

Multiple Tags-to-reader Collisions
• A tag collision occurs when more than one tag
attempts to transmit its ID at the same time,
the reader will receive a mixture of the tags’
signals and cannot understand it.
• This type of collision is shown in Figure.

Multiple Tags-to-reader Collisions
• Simultaneous responses from numerous tags
prevent the reader from correctly translating
the signal, which decreases throughput.
• No tag is aware of the activity of any other
tag, and so they cannot prevent the
simultaneous transmission of tags.
• To solve this problem, anti-collision protocols
are very influential.

Multiple Tags-to-reader Collisions -
Multi-access methods
• Each anti-collision protocol uses certain multi-
access methods for identification in order to
physically separate the transmitters’ signals.
• Accordingly, they can be categorized into four
different types:
– Space Division Multiple Access (SDMA)
– Frequency Division Multiple Access (FDMA)
– Code Division Multiple Access (CDMA)
– Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA)

• SDMA—
– The term space division multiple access relates to dividing of the
channel capacity into separate areas.
– Protocols based on this method can point the beam at different
areas in order to identify tags.
– The channel is spatially separated using complex directional
antennas.
• FDMA—
– Tags transmitting in one of several different frequency channels
requiring a complex receiver at the reader.
– Consequently, different frequency ranges can be used for
communication from and to the tags: from the reader to the
tags, 135 kHz, and from the tags to the reader, in the 433–435
MHz range.

• CDMA—
– Requires tags to multiply their ID by a pseudo-random sequence
(PN) before transmission.
– CDMA is quite good in many ways, such as the security of the
communications between the RFID tags and the reader, and
multiple tag identification.
• TDMA—
– Given that it is less expensive, this is the most widely used
method.
– This method involves the largest group of anti-collision
algorithms.
– The transmission channel is divided between the participants
and ensures that the reader can identify a tag at different times
in order to avoid interfering with another one.

Anti-collision protocols
• Aloha-based Protocols
– Aloha-based protocols use a random-access strategy
in order to successfully identify the number of tags in
an interrogation.
– They belong to the group of probabilistic protocols
because the tags transmit their own ID in randomly
selected slots in a frame in order to reduce the
possibility of a collision.
– However, there is no guarantee that all of the tags will
be identified in the interrogation process.
– These protocols suffer from the well-known tag
starvation problem.

• The main Aloha-based protocols can be
divided into four subgroups:
– Pure Aloha (PA)
– Slotted Aloha (SA)
– Frame Slotted Aloha (FSA)
– Dynamic Frame Slotted Aloha (DFSA) protocols.

• Pure Aloha (PA)
– Pure Aloha (PA) is one of the simplest anti-collision
protocols. It is based on TDMA.
– Whenever tags enter the interrogation zone, they
randomly choose a frequency on which to transmit
their data.
– A collision will occur if several tags transmit data at
the same time, resulting in complete or incomplete
collisions.
– A complete collision occurs when the messages of two
– tags fully collide; an incomplete collision, however,
takes place when only part of the tag message collides
with another tag message.

• Slotted Aloha (SA)
– To avoid incomplete collisions, Slotted Aloha (SA)
has been created.
– In SA, the time is divided into several slots and
each tag must randomly select a slot in which it
will transmit its data.
– The communication between the reader and the
tag is now synchronous.

• Framed Slotted Aloha (FSA)
– In Framed Slotted Aloha (FSA), the time is divided
into a variable number of frames and each frame
consists of several slots.
– All tags need to transmit data into a fixed length
frame, but each tag must choose only one slot in a
frame to transmit data.
– This protocol significantly reduces the probability
of collision since tags can only respond once in a
frame.

• Framed Slotted Aloha (FSA)

• Dynamic Frame Slotted Aloha (DFSA) protocol
– Dynamic Frame Slotted Aloha (DFSA) protocol is
capable of changing frame size according to an
estimate of the number of tags.
– At the beginning of each frame, the reader informs
the
– tags of the frame length.
– Every tag selects a random number [0,F−1], where F
denotes the frame size and all tags respond within the
number of slots.
– At the end of the frame, the reader estimates the
number of colliding tags, then adjusts F accordingly.

• Dynamic Frame Slotted Aloha (DFSA)
protocol

• Tree based Protocols:
– The query tree protocol (QT) is one of the most
representative memory less protocols, in which
the reader must provide the tags with a query and
the matching tags must respond with their full ID.

• Tree based Protocols:
– Tag response depends directly on the current query, ignoring the prior
communication history.
– QT tags involve only simple hardware requirements because they only
compare the reader query with their own ID and respond if it coincides.
– The identification process consists of more rounds in which the reader sends a
query, and tags whose ID prefix match the current query respond with their
whole ID binary value.
– In the case of a collision, the reader forms two new queries by appending q
with a binary 0 or 1.
– New queries will be placed in a Last Input First Output stack (LIFO).
– If there is no response to a query, the reader knows that there is no tag with
the required prefix, and the query is rejected.
– This kind of slot is called idle. If just one tag responds to the reader query, that
tag will be identified.
– By extending the query prefixes until only one tag’s ID matches, the algorithm
can identify the rest of the tags.
– The identification procedure is completed when the LIFO stack is empty.

• Hybrid Protocols:
– Hybrid protocols combine the advantages of tree-based
and Aloha-based protocols to avoid their problems and
provide better features in tag identification.
– Most of them first implement a tree-based procedure and
tag estimation procedure in order to predict the number of
tags.
– Therefore, the combined Aloha-based and tree-based
protocol procedures are known for their high complexity
and hardware demands.
– This kind of protocol can significantly increase
performance as compared to the previous ones.

Multiple Readers-to-tag Collision
• Reader collision occurs when the reader
attempts to make communication with tags
that are in the coverage area of another
reader.
• This type of collision is shown in Figure.
• The transmissions of three tags, shown in
Figure, are not synchronized, but in many
cases, the reader is synchronized with at least
one tag in the interrogation zone.

• This collision causes two different problems:
1. Signal interference occurs when the fields of two
or more readers overlap and interfere.
• This problem can be solved by programming all readers
to read at fractionally different times.
2. Multiple reads of the same tag occur when the
same tag is read once by every overlapping
reader.

• A multiple readers-to-tag collision occurs
when a tag is located at the intersection of
two or more readers’ interrogation ranges and
the readers attempt to communicate with this
tag simultaneously.
• Let Ri and Rj denote the read ranges of readers
ri and rj with dij their distance.
• Apparently, if:
Ri+Rj > dij

• and ri and rj communicate at the same time,
they will collide and the tags in the common
area will not be detected.
• Figure depicts two readers, r1 and r2, which
simultaneously transmit query messages to a
tag t1 situated within their overlapping region.
• t1 might not be able to read the query
messages from r1 and r2 due to interference.

Reader-to-reader Collision
• Reader-to-reader interference is induced when a signal
from one reader reaches other readers.
• This can happen even if there is no intersection among
reader interrogation ranges but because a neighbor
reader’s strong signal interferes with the weak reflected
signal from a tag.
• Figure demonstrates an example of collision from reader r2
to reader r1 when the latter tries to retrieve data from tag
t1.
• Generally, the signal strength of a reader is superior to that
of a tag and therefore if the frequency channel occupied by
r2 is the same as that between t1 and r1, r1 is no longer
able to listen to t1’s response.

Reader-to-reader Collision
• Reader-to-reader interference affects the read
range parameter. However, when interfering
• readers exist, the actual interrogation range of
the desired reader decreases to a circular
region with radius R↓max↑I, which can be
represented by:

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• IPv6 is good for IoT and IoT is good for IPv6.
• There are several arguments and features that
demonstrate that IPv6 is actually a key communication
enabler for the future Internet of Things:
– Scalability:
• IPv6 offers a highly scalable address scheme.
• The present scheme of Internet Governance provides at most 2 x
1019 unique, globally routable, addresses.
• This is many orders of magnitude more than the 2 x 109 that is
possible with IPv4.
• It is quite sufficient to address the needs of any present and future
communicating device still allowing it to have many addresses.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Solving the NAT barrier:
– Due to the limits of the IPv4 address space, the current
Internet had to adopt a stopgap solution to face its
unplanned expansion: The Network Address
Translation(NAT).
– It enables several users and devices to share the same
public IP address. This solution is working but with two
main trades-off:
• The NAT users are borrowing and sharing IP addresses with others.
While this technique allows single stakeholders to mount large
applications, it becomes completely unmanageable if the same
end-points are to be used by many different stakeholders; this
would occur in an IoT deployment where the same sensors are to
be used by multiple, independent, stakeholders.
• Secondly the mechanism cannot be used to access specific end-
points from the Internet.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Multi-Stakeholder Support:
– IPv6 provides for end devices to have multiple addresses and an even
more distributed routing mechanism than the IPv4 Internet.
– This allows different stakeholders to assign IoT end-device addresses
that are consistent with their own application and network practices.
– Thus, multiple stakeholders can deploy their own applications, sharing
a common sensor/actuation infrastructure, without impacting the
technical operation or governance of the Internet.
– Many features have been built into the basic IPv6 specifications that
are very useful both for the operation and the deployment of IoT.
– These include multicast, anycast, mobility support, auto-configuration
and address scope.
– Over the last decade, many new higher-level protocols have been
developed that are both useful for IoT and are well-suited to devices
with constrained resources. Examples are 6LowPAN (wireless nets),
COAP (transport with web services) and DTLS (secured datagrams).

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Tiny operating systems and network stacks:
– IPv6 application to the Internet of Things has been
researched for many years.
– The research community has developed several operating
systems like TinyOS and Contiki that are relatively small
and support the above protocol suites and environments.
– While the main IPv6 is very rich in possible features, these
reduced environments have often restricted carefully the
features available in order to meet IoT needs while
reducing the size of the underlying system and leaving
more space for applications.
– For example, a basic Contiki system takes less than
20KByte, and even one supporting a full IPv6 stack and the
other high-level protocols including DTLS can probably fit
into 70 Kbyte

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Increased hardware support:
– The operating system and network stack (with
security) could be made much more compact by
providing more hardware support in the chipset
(or a co-processor).
– However, such initiatives would detract from the
efficient porting of the system to other chipsets. It
would be desirable to make such upgrades for
large deployments in commercial environments.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Mapping of physical systems onto IPv6 address and
Privacy extension:
– It is possible to map many features of the physical IoT
devices onto IPv6 addresses.
– This can ease large-scale deployments – though at the cost
of revealing to anyone interested architectural features of
the IoT devices because of the transparency of the Domain
Name Service entries.
– In contrast, IPv6 provides for privacy by automatically
randomizing the suffix of the IPv6 address to hide the MAC
address or any serial number used as identifier when
connecting to the Internet.
– This feature is made available on all operating systems
automatically.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Use of Identifiers and improved functionality:
– By the use of Identifiers in conjunction with IPv6, one
can take advantages of IPv6 features without their
drawbacks.
– For example, with systems like Handle the structure
can mirror the topology of a deployment, while the
security features of the identifier system preclude
unauthorized access to this information.
– At the same time IPv6 addresses can be attributes of
the Handle Identifiers, but use the privacy
enhancements at the same time.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Enabling the extension of the Internet to the web
of things:
– IPv6 enables the extension of the Internet to any
device and service.
– Experiments have demonstrated the successful use of
IPv6 addresses to large-scale deployments of sensors
in smart buildings, smart cities and even with cattle.
– Moreover, the CoAP protocol enables the constrained
devices to behave as web services easily accessible
and fully compliant with REST architecture.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Mobility:
– IPv6 provides strong features and solutions to
support mobility of end-nodes, as well as mobility
of the routing nodes of the network.
– The project has also achieved some interesting
results on including Mobile IP in the Contiki stack.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Address auto-configuration:
– IPv6 provides an address self-configuration
mechanism (Stateless mechanism).
– The nodes can define their addresses in very
autonomous manner.
– This enables drastic reduction of IoT configuration
effort and deployment cost.
– With an Identifier-based system like Handle, this
technique can be combined with automated
procedures to derive authentication tokens from the
device, and have access control features added.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Fully Internet compliant Gateways:
– IPv6 Gateways can be fully Internet compliant.
– In other words, it is possible to build a proprietary
network of smart things or to interconnect one’s
own smart things with the rest of the World via a
gateway that is fully compliant with IP
requirements towards the Internet.

Why IPv6 suits IoT
• Standardisation:
– Some of the IoT6 developments like GLowBALIP
and the Identifier system would benefit hugely if
their attributes were standardized in this context
much more rigidly for IoT.
– EC initiatives should support directly such
standardization – possibly in a Support Action.

Identifiers and Locators for IoT
• Things connected to the IoT need an address system
that can uniquely identify each one in the network;
therefore, devices are able to use internet protocol (IP)
addresses as their identifiers (IDs) and locators (LOCs)
to communicate with others and to bind a host and an
application in the network.
• This binding provides some advantages for a wired and
fixed network environment because the internet was
originally designed for a fixed environment.
• Although it is important to consider the mobility
function in today’s network environment, this binding
still has several drawbacks such as mobility, multi-
homing, and extensibility problems.

• The exponential increase of mobile devices
especially causes the difficulties of deployment
and addressing in networks.
• Additionally, it is hard to maintain the routing
table size of a default free zone (DFZ).
• Therefore, binding is not suitable for current
mobile-oriented network environments.
• To provide a mobility function with scalable
routing and addressing, the ID and LOC roles of IP
addresses need to be separated for the future
internet.

• Thus, ID–LOC separation protocols have been proposed. These
proposed protocols use two namespaces as ID and LOC, and they
are classified into two types:
– host-based protocols
– network-based protocols.
• Host-based protocols, such as host identity protocol (HIP) and
Shim6, require the modification of a protocol stack within the hosts
and a rendezvous server for maintaining ID and LOC mapping
information.
• Additionally, it has the problem of initial deployment in a network.
In contrast, network-based schemes do not modify hosts’ protocol
stack.
• The end nodes do not participate in any signaling procedure.

• The ID–LOC mapping is processed by other
network components such as routers, and they
forward packets using tunneling according to the
mapping information.
• The problems are bandwidth waste and
processing overhead on the network caused by
tunneling.
• Host-based and network-based protocols also
require a centralized ID–LOC mapping system
such as a rendezvous server and a map server.
• These problems cause the scalability problem.

Host-Based Identifier–Locator
Separation Schemes
• Host-based ID–LOC separation protocol (HIP),
introduced new namespaces for separating the ID
and LOC of a host.
• It suggests to add a host identity layer between
the IP layer and the transport layer.
• The host identity layer communicates with the
upper layer using a host ID as an identifier and a
lower layer using an IP address for the locator.
• This layer maintains the mapping information
between identifiers and locators.

Separation Schemes
• Shim6 protocol provides site multi homing by
Internet Protocol version 6 (IPv6) intermediation.
• It suggested a multi homing shim layer called
l3shim within the IP layer for the local agility with
failover capabilities.
• The basic concept of Shim6 is similar to HIP, but it
does not use a special namespace such as a host
ID and locator in HIP.
• A host of Shim6 allows for multiple IPv6 address
prefixes to continue existing communication.

Separation Schemes
• MOFI (Mobile Oriented Future Internet) also uses
a host ID (HID) for ID and an LOC for a locator.
• However, MOFI uses two kinds of LOCs as a
locally routable LOC that must only be locally
unique in an access network (A-LOC) and a LOC
that is used in the backbone network (B-LOC).
• Each access router (AR) within MOFI operates the
LOC translation between the ALOC and B-LOC.
• For the maintenance of HID–LOC mapping, the
AR includes a Local Mapping Controller (LMC)
with a hash table and HID–LOC register (HLR).

Separation Schemes
• The HID–LOC mapping information are
managed in ARs in a distributed manner.
• The weakness of host-based protocols is that
every host has to modify its protocol stack.
• It makes the deployment of hosts difficult in a
network.
• Additionally, they need a centralized mapping
server to the ID–LOC mapping, so it may cause
a single point of failure.

Network-Based Identifier–Locator
Separation Schemes
• Locator Identifier Separation Protocol (LISP) is a representative
network-based ID–LOC separation protocol.
• LISP enables the separation of IP addresses into two new
numbering spaces.
• One is the Endpoint Identifiers (EIDs) that are not globally routable,
and the other is Routing Locators (RLOCs) that are globally routable.
• Also, LISP defines an encapsulating mechanism for the LISP routers
to transmit packets using EIDs across a network infrastructure that
uses RLOCs.
• The routers are responsible to lookup the mapping between EIDs
and RLOCs. In LISP, packets to the destination through Ingress
Tunnel Routers (ITRs) and Egress Tunnel Routers (ETRs).
• ITRs and ETRs are used as tunnel start and end points.

Network-Based Identifier–Locator
Separation Schemes
• A DHT-based Identifier–Locator Mapping Scheme (DHT–MAP) was
proposed to resolve LOC for a flat ID.
• The authors used a DHT-based system, which is a modified version
of the Content Addressable Network (CAN) system.
• The CAN is a DHT-based network that uses to map “keys” onto
“values.”
• The network consists of a customer network for forwarding packets
and an overlay network using CAN for maintaining ID–LOC mapping.
• In this scheme, every Autonomous System (AS) maintains one or
more resolvers to store EID–LOC mapping.
• Network-based protocols, however, require the tunneling for
forwarding packets.
• Because the use of tunneling needs an encapsulation and a DE
capsulation mechanism for processing the packets, it consumes
more bandwidth and processing overhead.

Open Data Format (O-DF): Data
Format for IoT
• Standard Data formats required for:
– IoT data sources (devices, machines, server-based
systems, etc.) to be able to publish their available
data and provide access to it in an easy and secure
way
– Providing means to filter the available data
depending on identifier, context, etc. at the
receiver end or service side

Format for IoT
• The O-DF can be used for publishing the
available data using ordinary URL (Uniform
Resource Locator) addresses.
• O-DF structures can also be used for
requesting and sending published data
between systems, notably when used
together with the Open Messaging Interface
(O-MI) standard.

Format for IoT
• In the IoT, information about a product or a “Thing” is
often distributed over many different devices, systems,
and organizations.
• The O-DF is intended to represent information about
things in a standardized way that can be understood
and exchanged in a universal way by all information
systems that need to manage such IoT-related data.
• A data format structure typically does not contain
complete information about a particular thing.
• Information about the same thing may be contained in
several different data format structures.

Format for IoT
• Object identifiers make it possible to link the data
about a single thing that may be located in different
information systems.
• An object identifier may be the only information that a
data format structure contains about a particular thing.
• The visibility and the access to data may depend on the
object identifier used, as well as on the identity of the
requesting party, as well as on the context of the
request.
• This is why the object identifier data structure is of
particular importance in any universal IoT standard.

Format for IoT
• The O-DF is specified using XML Schema.
• It defines a simple and extensible ontology that
allows the creation of information structures that
are similar to those of objects and properties in
object-oriented programming.
• It is thereby generic enough for the
representation of any object and information that
is needed for information exchange in domains
such as the IoT, lifecycle information
management, etc.

Format for IoT
• An O-DF structure is a hierarchy with an Objects element as
its top element, as shown in Illustration of O-DF Element
Hierarchy.
• The Objects element can contain any number of Object
sub-elements. Object elements are identified by at least
one id sub-element.
• An Object may also have an optional description sub-
element.
• Object elements usually have properties, which are sub-
elements called Info Item, as well as Object sub-elements.
• The resulting Object tree can contain any number of levels.
O-DF Objects provides detailed, normative descriptions of
these elements

Format for IoT

Format for IoT
• The O-DF is intended to be used for expressing information about
“any” identifiable object (products, services, humans, …).
• How the information is communicated is not a part of this standard.
• The communication media might be a file sent as an email
attachment, on a USB stick, or any other kind of media.
• O-DF content can also be sent using REST-based services, SOAP,
Java Message Service (JMS), the O-MI, and other kinds of
messaging protocols.
• The O-DF can be used as a query and response format in such
messaging; for instance, the O-MI specifies that a “read” request
with an O-DF structure should be responded to with the next level
in the hierarchy shown in the figure above.
• As an example, a request with only an “Objects” element should
return an O-DF response with the list of Object elements available,
including at least the compulsory attributes and sub-elements
(notably at least one id element).

SMART Tags in IoT (Examples)
• Staff Tracking
• Retail Industry
• Healthcare

IOE MODULE 5.pptx

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Was ist angesagt?

Was ist angesagt? (20)

Ähnlich wie IOE MODULE 5.pptx

Ähnlich wie IOE MODULE 5.pptx (20)

Mehr von nikshaikh786

Mehr von nikshaikh786 (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

IOE MODULE 5.pptx