A framework for harmonizing internet of things (IoT) in cloud: analyses and implementation

  • Md. Motaharul IslamEmail author
  • Zaheer Khan
  • Yazed Alsaawy


Internet of Things (IoT) refers to uniquely identifiable entities. Its vision is the world of connected objects. Due to its connected nature the data produced by IoT is being used for different purposes. Since IoT generates huge amount of data, we need some scalable storage to store and compute the data sensed from the sensors. To overcome this issue, we need the integration of cloud and IoT, so that the data might be stored and computed in a scalable environment. Harmonization of IoT in Cloud might be a novel solution in this regard. IoT devices will interact with each other using Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP). In this paper, we have implemented harmonizing IoT in Cloud. We have used CoAP to get things connected to each other through the Internet. For the implementation we have used two sensors, fire detector and the sensor attached with the door which is responsible for opening it. Thus our implementation will be storing and retrieving the sensed data from the cloud. We have also compared our implementation with different parameters. The comparison shows that our implementation significantly improves the performance compared to the existing system.


Harmonization Cloud Internet of things Constrained application protocol Smart environment Arduino shield 



We would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their very useful comments that helped us to enrich the quality and presentation of the paper.


  1. 1.
    Islam, Md. M., & Huh, E.-N. (2011). Sensor proxy mobile IPv6 (SPMIPv6)—a novel scheme for mobility supported IP-WSNs. Sensors, 2(11), 1865–1887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Islam, Md. M., Hassan, M. M., & Huh, E.-N. (2010). Sensor proxy mobile IPv6—a framework of mobility supported IP-WSN. In 13th international conference on computer and information technology (ICCIT), Dhaka, Bangladesh.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Islam, Md. M., & Huh, E.-N. (2011). A novel addressing scheme for PMIPv6 based global IP-WSNs. Sensors, 11(9), 8430–8455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Islam, Md. M., & Huh, E.-N. (2015). Energy efficient multilayer routing protocol for SPMIPv6 based IP-WSN. Special issue on: Internet of things. International Journal of Sensor Networks, 18(3/4), 114–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Islam, Md. M., Na, S.-H., Lee, S.-J., & Huh, E.-N. (2010). A novel scheme for PMIPv6 based wireless sensor network. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference on information security and assurance, Springer. LNCS 6485, Miyazaki, Japan, June 23 –25 (pp. 429–438).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Islam, Md. M., Nguyen, T. D., Saffar, A. A. A., Na, S.-H., & Huh, E.-N. (2010). Energy efficient framework for mobility supported smart IP-WSN. In Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on computational collective intelligence, technologies and applications. Springer. LNAI 6423, Kaohsiung, Taiwan, November 10–12 (pp. 282–291).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kum, S. W., Moon, J., Lim, T., & Park, J. (2015). A novel design of IoT cloud delegate framework to harmonize cloud-scale IoT services. In IEEE international conference on consumer electronics (ICCE) (pp. 247–248).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aazam, M., & Hung, P. P. (2014). Cloud of things integrating internet of things and cloud computing and the issues involved. In The proceedings of 11th IEEE international Bhurban conference on applied sciences and technology (IBCAST) (pp. 414–419).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Su, J.-H., Lee, C.-S., & Wu, W.-C. (2006). The design and implementation of a low-cost and programmable home automation module. IEEE Transactions on Consumer Electronics, 52(4), 1239–1244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Suciu, G. et al. (2013). Smart cities built on resilient cloud computing and secure internet of things. In 19th international conference control systems and computer science (CSCS) (pp. 513–518).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zanella, A., et al. (2014). Internet of things for smart cities. IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 1(1), 22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lev, T., Mazhelis, O., & Suomi, H. (2014). Comparing the cost-efficiency of CoAP and HTTP in web of things applications. Decision Support Systems, 63, 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kum, S. W. et al. (2015). A novel design of IoT cloud delegate framework to harmonize cloud-scale IoT services. In IEEE international conference consumer electronics (ICCE) (pp. 247–248).Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chong, G., Zhihao, L., & Yifeng. Y. (2011). The research and implement of smart home system based on internet of things. In International conference on electronics communications and control (ICECC) (pp. 2944–2947).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sharma, V., et al. (2017). IoT enabled smart-home. International Journal of Scientific Research in Computer Science Engineering and Information Technology (IJSRCSEIT), 2, 1032–1035.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Doukas, C., & Maglogiannis, I. (2012). Bringing IoT and cloud computing towards pervasive healthcare. In Sixth international conference on innovative mobile and internet services in ubiquitous computing (IMIS) (pp. 922–926). IEEE.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Viswanathan, A. (2017). Analysis of power consumption of the MQTT protocol. Ph.D thesis. University of Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thangavel, D., & Ma, X., Valera, A., Tan, H. -X.., & Tan, C. K. -Y. (2014). Performance evaluation of MQTT and CoAP via a common middleware. In IEEE ninth international conference on intelligent sensors sensor networks and information processing (ISSNIP) (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Divya, M. D., Korlepara, R., et al. (2016). Performance evaluation of CoAP and UDP using NS-2 for fire alarm system. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 9(20), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pham, T. N., Tsai M. F. et al. (2015). A cloud-based smart-parking system based on internet-of-things technologies. IEEE Access (pp. 1581–1591).Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Khan, R. et al. (2012). Future internet the internet of things architecture, Possible applications and key challenges. In 10th international conference on frontiers of information technology (FIT) (pp. 257–260).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ting, M. W. et al. (2010). Research on the architecture of internet of things. In 3rd international conference on advanced computer theory and engineering (ICACTE) (Vol. 5, p. V5-484).Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Botta, A. et al. (2014). On the integration of cloud computing and internet of things. In The 2nd international conference on future internet of things and cloud (FiCloud) (pp. 23–30).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Betzler, A., & Gomez, C. et al. (2014). Congestion control for CoAP cloud services. In IEEE emerging technology and factory automation (ETFA), 16.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Daniel, L., Kojo, M., & Latvala, M. (2014). Experimental evaluation of the CoAP, HTTP and SPDY transport services for internet of things. In G. Fortino, G. D. Fatta, W. Li, S. Ochoa, A. Cuzzocrea, & M. Pathan (Eds.), International conference on internet and distributed computing systems (pp. 111–123). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Google Cloud Homepage. Accessed on November 15 2018.
  27. 27.
    Thingspeak Homepage. Accessed on November 15, 2018.
  28. 28.
    000Webhost Homepage. Accessed on November 15, 2018.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of CSEBRAC UniversityDhakaBangladesh
  2. 2.Khana-e-Noor UniversityKabulAfghanistan
  3. 3.Islamic University of MadinahMadinahKingdom of Saudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations