A critical analysis of RPL objective functions in internet of things paradigm (original) (raw)

Abstract

IoT supports a spectrum of applications, each of which has certain specific requirements. For instance, mission critical applications cannot tolerate delay in data transmission however simple monitoring applications are delay tolerant. The lifetime and performance of IoT sensor networks depend on the metric/constraint (ETX, Energy etc.) selected for routing path, data size and quality of service required. The selection of metric /constraint dependent Objective function (OF) in RPL provides a range of solutions for IoT applications. However, state-of-art solutions mainly focus on single metric/constraint resulting in poor performance of protocol. To understand the protocol behavior for different metrics (single and combined) a complete evaluation of RPL over important performance parameters is needed. Researchers have proposed several routing algorithms which are application specific and do not define a generic parent selection process. We require a structured algorithm for Minimum Rank Hysteresis Objective Function (MRHOF) applicable to majority of IoT applications. In this paper we have proposed a generalized algorithm for MRHOF along with routing path cost evaluation which defines the complete parent selection process. Further, comparative analysis of different RPL OFs has been done to identify suitable OF for enhanced RPL performance. Performance evaluation parameters have been extended to PDR, power consumption, hop count, average ETX, Rt metric and inter packet time, for different network size and link quality. Results are obtained using Cooja simulator of Contiki. RPL with combined metric provide 24% higher PDR, 28% lower power consumption and 39% lower inter-packet time as compared to RPL with single metric.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bosche A, Crawford D, Jackson D, Schallehn M, Schorling C (2018) Unlocking Opportunities in the Internet of Things. Retrieved from https://www.bain.com/contentassets/5aa3a678438846289af59f62e62a3456/bain_brief_unlocking_opportunities_in_the_internet_of_things.pdf. Accessed 22 Feb 2019
  2. Umamaheswari S, Negi A (2017) Internet of things and RPL routing protocol: a study and evaluation. In 2017 International Conference on Computer Communication and Informatics (ICCCI) (pp. 1–7). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCCI.2017.8117763
  3. Winter, T., Struik, R., Kelsey, R., Thubert, P., Brandt, A., Hui, J., … Alexander, R. (2012). RFC 6550 - RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks. from https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc6550.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2019
  4. Kharrufa H, Al-Kashoash H, Al-Nidawi Y, Mosquera MQ, Kemp AH (2017) Dynamic RPL for multi-hop routing in IoT applications. In 2017 13th Annual Conference on Wireless On-demand Network Systems and Services (WONS) (pp. 100–103). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/WONS.2017.7888753
  5. Zhou Z, Yao B, Xing R, Shu L, Bu S (2016) E-CARP: an energy efficient routing protocol for UWSNs in the internet of underwater things. IEEE Sensors J 16(11):4072–4082. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSEN.2015.2437904
    Article Google Scholar
  6. Talwar M (2015) Routing techniques and protocols for internet of things: a survey. In Proceeding of NCRIET-2015 & Indian J.Sci.Res (Vol. 12, pp. 417–423). Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/7d02/56cc73029033f8236a005161250ec3cdda12.pdf
  7. Gaddour O, Koubâa A (2012) RPL in a nutshell: a survey. Comput Netw 56(14):3163–3178. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMNET.2012.06.016
    Article Google Scholar
  8. Vasseur J, Kim M, Pister K, Dejean N, Barthel D (2012) RFC 6551 - Routing Metrics Used for Path Calculation in Low-Power and Lossy Networks. https://tools.ietf.org/pdf/rfc6551.pdf. Accessed 20 Jan 2019
  9. Zhao M, Kumar A, Joo Chong PH, Lu R (2017) A comprehensive study of RPL and P2P-RPL routing protocols: implementation, challenges and opportunities. Peer-to-Peer Network Appl 10(5):1232–1256. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-016-0475-y
    Article Google Scholar
  10. Aijaz A, Aghvami AH (2015) Cognitive machine-to-machine Communications for Internet-of-Things: a protocol stack perspective. IEEE Internet Things J 2(2):103–112. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2015.2390775
    Article Google Scholar
  11. Qasem M, Al-Dubai A, Romdhani I, Ghaleb B, Gharibi W (2016) A new efficient objective function for routing in internet of things paradigm. In 2016 IEEE Conference on Standards for Communications and Networking (CSCN) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/CSCN.2016.7785168
  12. Lamaazi H, Benamar N, Imaduddin MI, Jara AJ (2015) Performance assessment of the routing protocol for low power and lossy networks. In 2015 International Conference on Wireless Networks and Mobile Communications (WINCOM) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/WINCOM.2015.7381329
  13. Aman MS, Yelamarthi K, Abdelgawad A (2017) A comparative analysis of simulation and experimental results on RPL performance. In 2017 IEEE 8th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON) (pp. 483–487). IEEE. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/UEMCON.2017.8248996
  14. Mardini W, Aljawarneh S, Al-Abdi A, Taamneh H (2018) Performance evaluation of RPL objective functions for different sending intervals. In 2018 6th International Symposium on Digital Forensic and Security (ISDFS) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/ISDFS.2018.8355323
  15. Lamaazi H, Benamar N (2020) A comprehensive survey on enhancements and limitations of the RPL protocol: a focus on the objective function. Ad Hoc Netw 96:102001. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2019.102001
    Article Google Scholar
  16. Qasem M, Altawssi H, Yassien MB, Al-Dubai A (2015) Performance evaluation of RPL objective functions. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing and Communications; Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing; Pervasive Intelligence and Computing (pp. 1606–1613). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/CIT/IUCC/DASC/PICOM.2015.242
  17. Abied Hatem J, Safa H, El-Hajj W (2017) Enhancing routing protocol for low power and Lossy networks. In 2017 13th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC) (pp. 753–758). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/IWCMC.2017.7986379
  18. Lamaazi H, Benamar N (2018) OF-EC: a novel energy consumption aware objective function for RPL based on fuzzy logic. J Netw Comput Appl 117:42–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnca.2018.05.015
  19. Bhandari KS, Cho GH (2019) A resource oriented route selection framework using contextual information based on fuzzy logic. Electronics (Switzerland), 8(9). https://doi.org/10.3390/electronics8091023
  20. Lamaazi H, Benamar N (2019) A Novel Approach for RPL Assessment Based on the Objective Function and Trickle Optimizations. Wireless Commun Mobile Comput. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/4605095
  21. Lamaazi H, Ahmadi A El, Benamar N, Jara AJ (2019) OF-ECF: a new optimization of the objective function for parent selection in RPL. In International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (Vol. 2019-October, pp. 27–32). IEEE computer society. https://doi.org/10.1109/WiMOB.2019.8923273
  22. Al-fuqaha A, Guizani M, Mohammadi M, Aledhari M, Ayyash M (2015) Internet of Things: A Survey on Enabling Technologies , Protocols and Applications. IEEE 17(November):2347–2376. https://doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2015.2444095
    Article Google Scholar
  23. Lamaazi H, Benamar N, Jara AJ (2017) Study of the impact of designed objective function on the RPL-based routing protocol. Springer, Singapore, pp 67–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1627-1_6
    Book Google Scholar
  24. Lassouaoui L, Rovedakis S, Sailhan F, Wei A (2016) Evaluation of energy aware routing metrics for RPL. In 2016 IEEE 12th International Conference on Wireless and Mobile Computing, Networking and Communications (WiMob) (pp. 1–8). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/WiMOB.2016.7763212
  25. Oliveira A, Vazão T (2016) Low-power and lossy networks under mobility: a survey. Comput Netw 107:339–352. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.COMNET.2016.03.018
    Article Google Scholar
  26. Pradeska, N., Widyawan, Najib W, & Kusumawardani SS (2016) Performance analysis of objective function MRHOF and OF0 in routing protocol RPL IPV6 over low power wireless personal area networks (6LoWPAN). In 2016 8th International Conference on Information Technology and Electrical Engineering (ICITEE) (pp. 1–6). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICITEED.2016.7863270
  27. De Couto DSJ, Aguayo D, Bicket J, Morris R (2003) A high-throughput path metric for multi-hop wireless routing. In: Proceedings of the 9th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking - MobiCom ‘03. ACM Press, New York, p 134. https://doi.org/10.1145/938985.939000
    Chapter Google Scholar
  28. Thubert P (2012) RFC 6552 - Objective Function Zero for the Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks …RPL—. Retrieved from http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info
  29. Gnawali O, Levis P (2012) RFC 6719 - The Minimum Rank with Hysteresis Objective Function. Retrieved from http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6719. Accessed 25 Feb 2019
  30. Miguel M, Jamhour E, Pellenz M, Penna M (2017) A power planning algorithm based on RPL for AMI wireless sensor networks. Sensors 17(4):679. https://doi.org/10.3390/s17040679
    Article Google Scholar
  31. Imran CM, Aldukhail M, Almezeini N, Alnuem M (2016) Potential applications of linear wireless sensor networks: a survey. Int J Comput Netw Commun Secur (Vol. 4). Retrieved from www.ijcncs.org. Accessed 2 July 2019
  32. Subhan F, Noreen M, Imran M, Tariq M, Khan A, Shoaib M (2019) Impact of node deployment and routing for protection of critical infrastructures. IEEE Access 7:11502–11514. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2891667
    Article Google Scholar
  33. Gupta SP (2014) Statistical Methods, “Statistical Inference- Tests of Hypotheses” (44th ed.). Sultan Chand & Sons. Retrieved from https://books.google.co.in/books/about/Statistical_Methods.html?id=e_x-PAAACAAJ. Accessed 3 March 2019

Download references

Acknowledgements

We want to thank the Department of Science and Technology (DST), Govt. of India, for supporting the project grant no. SR/WOS-A/ET-8/2018 and Gautam Buddha University to provide facilities and support for completing this research work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information and Communication Technology, Gautam Buddha University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, 201308, India
    Neeti Gupta & Vidushi Sharma
  2. Department of Science &Technology, Ministry of Science and Technology, Government of India, New Delhi, India
    Anuradha Pughat

Authors

  1. Neeti Gupta
  2. Anuradha Pughat
  3. Vidushi Sharma

Corresponding author

Correspondence toNeeti Gupta.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gupta, N., Pughat, A. & Sharma, V. A critical analysis of RPL objective functions in internet of things paradigm.Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 14, 2187–2208 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-021-01180-9

Download citation

Keywords