Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userPersonal Internet of Things (PIoT): What is it Exactly?
280
0
0.0
(
0
)
Added by
Biswa P. S. Sahoo
Publication date
2021
fields
Informatics Engineering
and research's language is
English
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
The use of Internet of Things (IoT) devices in homes and the immediate proximity of an individual communicates to create Personal IoT (PIoT) networks. The exploratory study of PIoT is in its infancy, which will explore the expansion of new use cases, service requirements, and the proliferation of PIoT devices. This article provides a big picture of PIoT architecture, vision, and future research scope.
rate research
Read More
After 50 years, the Internet is still defined as a collection of interconnected networks. Yet desires of countries for their own internet (Internet secession?), country-level firewalling, and persistent peering disputes all challenge the idea of a single set of interconnected networks. We show that the Internet today has peninsulas of persistent, partial connectivity, and that some outages cause islands where the Internet at the site is up, but partitioned from the main Internet. We propose a new definition of the Internet defining a single, global network while helping us to reason about peninsulas and islands and their relationship to Internet outages. We provide algorithms to detect peninsulas and islands, find that peninsulas are more common than outages, with thousands of /24s IPv4 blocks that are part of peninsulas lasting a month or more. Root causes of most peninsula events (45%) are transient routing problems. However, a few long-lived peninsulas events (7%) account for 90% of all peninsula time, and they suggest root causes in country- or AS-level policy choices. We also show that islands occur. Our definition shows that no single country can unilaterally claim to be the Internet, and helps clarify the spectrum from partial reachability to outages in prior work.
The Internet of Things combines various earlier areas of research. As a result, research on the subject is still organized around these pre-existing areas: distributed computing with services and objects, networks (usually combining 6lowpan with Zigbee etc. for the last-hop), artificial intelligence and semantic web, and human-computer interaction. We are yet to create a unified model that covers all these perspectives - domain, device, service, agent, etc. In this paper, we propose the concept of cells as units of structure and context in the Internet of things. This allows us to have a unified vocabulary to refer to single entities (whether dumb motes, intelligent spimes, or virtual services), intranets of things, and finally the complete Internet of things. The question that naturally follows, is what criteria we choose to demarcate boundaries; we suggest various possible answers to this question. We also mention how this concept ties into the existing visions and protocols, and suggest how it may be used as the foundation of a formal model.
We propose a roadmap for leveraging the tremendous opportunities the Internet of Things (IoT) has to offer. We argue that the combination of the recent advances in service computing and IoT technology provide a unique framework for innovations not yet envisaged, as well as the emergence of yet-to-be-developed IoT applications. This roadmap covers: emerging novel IoT services, articulation of major research directions, and suggestion of a roadmap to guide the IoT and service computing community to address key IoT service challenges.
The recent history has witnessed disruptive advances in disciplines related to information and communication technologies that have laid a rich technological ecosystem for the growth and maturity of latent paradigms in this domain. Among them, sensor networks have evolved from the originally conceived set-up where hundreds of nodes with sensing and actuating functionalities were deployed to capture information from their environment and act accordingly (coining the so-called wireless sensor network concept) to the provision of such functionalities embedded in quotidian objects that communicate and work together to collaboratively accomplish complex tasks based on the information they acquire by sensing the environment. This is nowadays a reality, embracing the original idea of an Internet of things (IoT) forged in the late twentieth century, yet featuring unprecedented scales, capabilities and applications ignited by new radio interfaces, communication protocols and intelligent data-based models. This chapter examines the latest findings reported in the literature around these topics, with a clear focus on IoT communications, protocols and platforms, towards ultimately identifying opportunities and trends that will be at the forefront of IoT-related research in the near future.
Wireless medium access control (MAC) and routing protocols are fundamental building blocks of the Internet of Things (IoT). As new IoT networking standards are being proposed and different existing solutions patched, evaluating the end-to-end performance of the network becomes challenging. Specific solutions designed to be beneficial, when stacked may have detrimental effects on the overall network performance. In this paper, an analysis of MAC and routing protocols for IoT is provided with focus on the IEEE 802.15.4 MAC and the IETF RPL standards. It is shown that existing routing metrics do not account for the complex interactions between MAC and routing, and thus novel metrics are proposed. This enables a protocol selection mechanism for selecting the routing option and adapting the MAC parameters, given specific performance constraints. Extensive analytical and experimental results show that the behavior of the MAC protocol can hurt the performance of the routing protocol and vice versa, unless these two are carefully optimized together by the proposed method.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
