Middleware for Wireless Sensor Networks: The Comfortable Way of Application Development

  • Kirsten TerflothEmail author
  • Mesut Güneş
  • and Jochen Schiller
Part of the Computer Communications and Networks book series (CCN)


Application development for wireless sensor networks (WSNs) demands for expertise in distributed as well as embedded programming. To ease the task of application development and make this area more accessible to nonexperts, middleware abstractions are commonly employed. Middleware is defined as software which is located in between software applications. Similar to operating systems, middleware systems provide applications with additional services to implement their functionality in a more abstract manner. Since devices forming a WSN have only little capabilities in terms of processing power and memory, their corresponding operating systems only provide very basic support for application development. At the same time various kinds of applications do have additional requirements to simplify their implementation. A multitude of middleware approaches are available to fill in this gap, thus provide support for comfortable application development. We will discuss common application building blocks in this domain, discuss a selection of middleware approaches available, and provide an evaluation of their applicability by mapping application needs to middleware services.


Sensor Network Sensor Node Wireless Sensor Network Mobile Agent Application Development 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    K. Martinez, P. Padhy, A. Riddoch, R. Ong, and J. Hart. Glacial environment monitoring using sensor networks. In: Real-World Wireless Sensor Networks (REALWSN 2005), June 20–21 2005, Stockholm, Sweden.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G. Werner-Allen, K. Lorincz, J. Johnson, J. Lees, and M. Welsh. Fidelity and yield in a volcano monitoring sensor network. In USENIX’06: Proceedings of the Seventh Conference on USENIX Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, pp. 381–396, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2006. Berkeley, CA: USENIX Association.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    R. Freeman. Autonomous monitoring of vulnerable habitats. Available at: Last access: 06.03.2008.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A. Mainwaring, J. Polastre, R. Szewczyk, D. Culler, and J. Anderson. Wireless sensor networks for habitat monitoring. In ACM International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications (WSNA’02), Atlanta, GA, September 2002.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    A. Deshpande, C. Guestrin, and S. Madden. Resource-aware wireless sensor actuator networks. IEEE Data Engineering Bulletin, 28(1):40–47, 2005.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    G. Wittenburg, K. Terfloth, F. L. Villafuerte, T. Naumowicz, H. Ritter, and J. Schiller. Fence monitoring – Experimental evaluation of a use case for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Wireless Sensor Networks (EWSN ’07), pp. 163–178, Delft, The Netherlands, January 2007.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Costa, G. Coulson, C. Mascolo, G. P. Picco, and S. Zachariadis. The RUNES middleware: A reconfigurable component-based approach to networked embedded systems. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual IEEE International Symposium on Personal Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC’05), Berlin (Germany), September 2005.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    G. Tolle, J. Polastre, R. Szewczyk, D. Culler, N. Turner, K. Tu, S. Burgess, T. Dawson, P. Buonadonna, D. Gay, and W. Hong. A macroscope in the redwoods. In SenSys ’05: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems, pp. 51–63, New York, NY: ACM, 2005.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. A. Bernstein. Middleware: A model for distributed system services. Communications of the ACM, 39(2):86–98, 1996.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    OMG Specification: The Common Object Request Broker: Architecture and Specification, Revision 2.0, OMG Document.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    K. Whitehouse, C. Sharp, E. Brewer, and D. Culler. Hood: a neighborhood abstraction for sensor networks. In MobiSys ’04: Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Mobile Systems, Applications, and Services, pp. 99–110, New York, NY: ACM Press, 2004.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    D. Gay, P. Levis, R. von Behren, M. Welsh, E. Brewer, and D. Culler. The nesc language: A holistic approach to networked embedded systems, In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    L. Mottola and G. P. Picco. Logical neighborhoods: A programming abstraction for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), Number 4026 in Lecture Notes on Computer Science, pp. 150–167, San Francisco, CA, June 2006.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. Costa, L. Mottola, A. L. Murphy, and G. P. Picco. Programming wireless sensor networks with the teenylime middleware. In Proceedings of the Eighth ACM/IFIP/USENIX International Middleware Conference (Middleware 2007), Newport Beach, CA, November 2007.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. R. Madden, M. J. Franklin, J. M. Hellerstein, and W. Hong, 2005. TinyDB: an acquisitional query processing system for sensor networks. ACM Transactions on Database System 30:1, 2005.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    R. Newton and M. Welsh. Region streams: functional macroprogramming for sensor networks. In DMSN ’04: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Data Management for Sensor Networks, pp. 78–87, New York, NY: ACM, 2004.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    R. Newton, G. Morrisett, and M. Welsh. The regiment macroprogramming system. In Proceedings of IPSN, pp. 489–498, New York, NY: ACM, 2007.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    R. Gummadi, O. Gnawali, and R. Govindan, Macro-programming wireless sensor networks using kairos. In Proceedings of the First International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), 2005.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    N. Kothari, R. Gummadi, T. Millstein, and R. Govindan. Reliable and efficient programming abstractions for wireless sensor networks. In PLDI ’07: Proceedings of the 2007 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pp. 200–210, New York, NY: ACM, 2007.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    P. Levis and D. Culler. Mate: A tiny virtual machine for sensor networks. In International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, San Jose, CA, October 2002.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    K. Terfloth, G. Wittenburg, and J. Schiller. FACTS – A rule-based middleware architecture for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the First IEEE/ACM International Conference on COMmunication System softWAre and MiddlewaRE (COMSWARE’06), New Delhi, India, January 2006.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    C.-L. Fok, G.-C. Roman, and C. Lu. Mobile agent middleware for sensor networks: An application case study. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN’05), pp. 382–387, IEEE, 2005.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    G. Hackmann, C.-L. Fok, G.-C. Roman, and C. Lu. Agimone: Middleware support for seamless integration of sensor and IP networks. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4026, pp. 101–118, 2006.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    T. Liu and M. Martonosi. Impala: A middleware system for managing autonomic, parallel sensor systems, In ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming, June 2003.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    P. Juang, H. Oki, Y. Wang, M. Martonosi, L. S. Peh, and D. Rubenstein. Energy-efficient computing for wildlife tracking: design tradeoffs and early experiences with zebranet. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, vol. 37, pp. 96–107, New York, NY: ACM, 2002.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    D. Chu, K. Lin, A. Linares, G. Nguyen, and J. M. Hellerstein. Sdlib: a sensor network data and communications library for rapid and robust application development. In IPSN ’06: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks, pp. 432–440, New York, NY: ACM, 2006.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kirsten Terfloth
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mesut Güneş
  • and Jochen Schiller
  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceComputer Systems and Telematics (CST), Freie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations