Advertisement

Sensor’s Energy and Performance Enhancement Using LIBP in Contiki with Cooja

  • Shambhavi MishraEmail author
  • Pawan Singh
  • Sudeep Tanwar
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1059)

Abstract

There are various sparing protocols that help to gather the information from various sensors and broadcast via network as represented in this paper. The protocol known as LIBP, it is a lightweight pathway helps to build a spanning routing tree with minimum distance. The distance between the routing tree to root node that based upon the scatter information via sporadic beaconing process. The information can be gathered through sensors via LIBP. The matching traffic record can flow from note to sink in a network. The simulation is done on the Contiki OS under a Cooja simulator. The LIBP outperforms the special version of RPL in the term of power consumption, scalability, and throughput in the CTP protocols.

Keywords

IoT LIBP CTP RPL Efficiency Security 

References

  1. 1.
    Vasseur J, Dunkels A (2010) Interconnecting smart objects with IP, the next internet. Morgan Kaufmann. ISBN: 9780123751652Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bagula A, Djenouri D, Karbab EB (2013) Ubiquitous sensor network management: the least interference beaconing model. In: Proceedings of the IEEE 24th international symposium on personal indoor and mobile radio communications (PIMRC), September 8–11, pp 2352–2356. ISSN 2166-9570Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bagula AB, Djenouri D, Karbab E (2013) On the relevance of using interference and service differentiation routing in the internet-of-things. In: Balandin S, Andreev S, Koucheryavy Y (eds) NEW2AN 2013 and ruSMART 2013. LNCS, vol 8121. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 25–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Levis P, Lee N, Welsh M, Culler D (2003) TOSSIM: simulating large wireless sensor networks of tinyos motes. In: Proceedings of ACM, SenSys 2003, Los Angeles, CA, pp 126–137Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gnawali O, Fonseca R, Jamieson K, Moss D, Levis P (2009) Collection tree protocol. In: Proceedings of ACM, SenSys 2009, Berkeley, CA/USA, November 4–6Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Winter T et al (2012) RPL: IPv6 routing protocol for low-power and lossy networks, RFC 6550Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dunkels A, Gronvall B, Voigt T (2007) Contiki—a lightweight and flexible operating system for tiny networked sensors. In: 29th annual IEEE international conference on local computer networks, pp 455–462Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dunkels A (2007) Poster abstract: Rime: a lightweight layered communication stack for sensor networks. In: European conference on wireless sensor networks (EWSN), Delft, The NetherlandsGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Levis P, Patel N, Culler D, Shenker S (2004) Trickle: a self regulating algorithm for code maintenance and propagation in wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the USENIX NSDI Conference, San Francisco, CAGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Dunkels A, Osterlind F, Tsiftes N, He Z (2007) Software-based online sensor node energy estimation. In: ACM Proceeding of the 4th workshop on embedded networked sensors (EmNets 2007), pp 28–32Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thubert P (2012) objective function zero for the routing protocol for low-power and lossy networks (RPL). Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), Request for Comments 6552, 1–14 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bagula A (2007) On achieving bandwidth-aware LSP/LambdaSP multiplexing/separation in multi-layer networks. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun (JSAC): Special issue on Traffic Engineering for Multi-Layer Networks 25(5)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bagula A (2004) Hybrid traffic engineering: the least path interference algorithm. In: Proceedings of ACM annual research conference of the South African Institute of Computer Scientists and Information Technologists on IT research in developing countries, pp 89–96Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bagula AB (2006) Hybrid routing in next generation IP networks. Elsevier Comput Commun 29(7):879–892CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bagula A, Krzesinski AE (2001) Traffic engineering label switched paths in IP networks using a pre-planned flow optimization model. In: Proceedings of the ninth international symposium on modelling, analysis and simulation of computer and telecommunication systems (MASCOTS 2001), pp 70–77Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zennaro M, Bagula A (2010) Design of a flexible and robust gateway to collect sensor data in intermittent power environments. Int J Sensor Netw 8(3/4)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bagula A, Zennaro M, Inggs G, Scott S, Gascon D (2012) Ubiquitous sensor networking for development (USN4D): an application to pollution monitoring. MDPI Sens 12(1):391–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bagula A (2010) Modelling and implementation of QoS in wireless sensor Networks: A multiconstrained traffic engineering model. EURASIP J Wireless Commun Netw, Article ID 468737,  https://doi.org/10.1155/2010/468737

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringAmity UniversityNoidaIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer Engineering, Institute of TechnologyNirma UniversityAhmedabadIndia

Personalised recommendations