Annals of Telecommunications

, Volume 72, Issue 1–2, pp 19–30 | Cite as

A resilient Internet of Things architecture for smart cities

  • David Perez Abreu
  • Karima Velasquez
  • Marilia Curado
  • Edmundo Monteiro
Article

Abstract

Nowadays, technology is such an integral part of our lives that the dependency on its benefits is growing faster than ever. With the arrival of the paradigms of smart cities and the Internet of Things, citizens are able to improve their quality of life. Given that sensors and actuators deployed in smart cities usually have limited resources, today, it is a common practice to use cloud computing to extend the scope and benefits of smart cities. Taking into consideration that communication between applications and devices is vital for a good performance of services in a smart city, it is necessary to design new architectures and mechanisms to provide reliability in communications. A key aspect that has to be addressed by the new communications approaches is the possibility to recover the network and its services in case of faults, without human intervention. In this paper, a novel architecture to improve the resilience level of the infrastructure in the Internet of Things is proposed. Moreover, technologies to implement the components from the architecture are suggested. This proposal is discussed within the scope of the SusCity project.

Keywords

Internet of Things Smart city Resilience Cloud computing Architecture 

References

  1. 1.
    Satyanarayanan M, Bahl P, Caceres R, Davies N (2009) The case for vm-based cloudlets in mobile computing. IEEE Pervasive Comput 8(4):14–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    SusCity-Project (2015) FCT-SusCity Project, http://goo.gl/4WlgpC. Last visited: 2016-05-19.
  3. 3.
    IBM Industry Solutions (2013) IBM smarter cities—creating opportunities through leadership and innovation,” IBM - https://goo.gl/7aLzQM
  4. 4.
    TUWIEN Vienna University of Technology (2015) European smart cities,”http://www.smart-cities.eu. Last visited 2016-03-20.
  5. 5.
    Han X, Cao X, Lloyd EL, Shen CC (2010) Fault-tolerant relay node placement in heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 9(5):643–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Al-Turjman FM, Hassanein HS, Alsalih WM, Ibnkahla M (2011) Optimized relay placement for wireless sensor networks federation in environmental applications. Wirel Commun Mob Comput 11(12):1677–1688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Le Q, Ngo-Quynh T, Magedanz T (2014) RPL-based multipath routing protocols for Internet of Things on wireless sensor networks. In: 2014 International Conference on Advanced Technologies for Communications (ATC 2014).Hanoi, Vietnam: IEEE, pp 424–429Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Pavković B, Theoleyre F, Duda A (2011) Multipath opportunistic rpl routing over IEEE 802.15.4. In: In proceedings of the 14th ACM International Conference on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp 179–186Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ros FJ, Ruiz PM (2014) Five nines of southbound reliability in software-defined networks. In: Inproceedings of the Third Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp 31–36Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beheshti N, Zhang Y (2012) Fast failover for control traffic in software-defined networks, in Global Communications Conference (GLOBECOM), 2012 IEEE. Anaheim, USA: IEEEGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Stephens B, Cox AL, Rixner S (2013) Plinko: building provably resilient forwarding tables. In: In proceedings of the Twelfth ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks. New York, NY, USA: ACM,pp. 26:1–26:7Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Reitblatt M, Canini M, Guha A, Foster N (2013) Fattire: declarative fault tolerance for software-defined networks. In: In proceedings of the Second ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp 109–114Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kirkpatrick K (2013) Software-Defined Networking. Commun ACM 56(9):16–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xiao J, Boutaba R (2014) Reconciling the overlay and underlay tussle. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 22 (5):1489–1502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khan MMA, Shahriar N, Ahmed R, Boutaba R (2015) SiMPLE: Survivability in multi-path link embedding in Network and Service Management(CNSM). In: 2015 11th International Conference on. Barcelona, Spain: IEEE, pp 210–218Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rahman MR, Boutaba R (2013) SVNE: survivable virtual network embedding algorithms for network virtualization. IEEE Trans Netw Serv Manag 10(2):105–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fajjari I, Aitsaadi N, Pujolle G Cloud networking: an overview of virtual network embedding strategies, in Global Information Infrastructure Symposium - GIIS 2013. Trento. Italy: IEEE, 2013:1–7Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Internet of Things Architecture (2010) IoT-A, http://www.iot-a.eu. Last visited: 2016-05-10
  19. 19.
    Bassi A, Bauer M, Fiedler M, Kramp T, Van Kranenburg R, Lange S, Meissner S (2013) Enabling things to talk. Designing IoT Solutions With the IoT Architectural Reference Model:163– 211Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Pöhls HC, Angelakis V, Suppan S, Fischer K, Oikonomou G, Tragos EZ, Rodriguez RD, Mouroutis T rerum: building a reliable IoT upon privacy- and security-enabled smart objectsGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    RERUM (2013) Reliable, resilient and secure IoT for smart city applications, https://ict-rerum.eu. Last visited: 2016-05-10
  22. 22.
    Datta S, Bonnet C, Nikaein N (2014) An IoT gateway centric architecture to provide novel M2M services. In: 2014 IEEE World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-iot). Seoul, South Korea: IEEE, pp 514–519Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Atzori L, Iera A, Morabito G, Nitti M (2012) The Social Internet of Things (SIot)—when social networks meet the internet of things: concept, architecture and network characterization. Comput Netw 56(16):3594–3608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hao Y, Linke G, Ruidong L, Asaeda H, Yuguang F (2014) Dataclouds: enabling community-based data-centric services over the Internet of Things. IEEE Internet of Things J 1(5):472– 482CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jin J, Gubbi J, Tie L, Palaniswami M (2012) Network architecture and QoS issues in the internet of things for a smart city. In: 2012 International Symposium on Communications and Information Technologies (ISCIT). Gold Coast, Australia: IEEE, pp 956–961Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Matias J, Garay J, Toledo N, Unzilla J, Jacob E (2015) Toward an SDN-enabled NFV architecture. Commun Mag, IEEE 53(4):187–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Jiong J, Gubbi J, Marusic S, Palaniswami M (2014) An information framework for creating a smart city through internet of things. Internet of Things J, IEEE 1(2):112–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    IoT-Eclipse (2015) IoT Eclipse - Kura,https://eclipse.org/kura. Last visited: 2016-04-21
  29. 29.
    Winter T, Thubert P, Brandt A, Hui J, Kelsey R, Levis P, Pister K, Struik R, Vasseur J, Alexander R (2012) RPL: IPv6 routing protocol for low-power and lossy networks, IETF, IETF, RFC 6550, March 2012, [Online]. Available: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6550
  30. 30.
    IETF (2015) Routing Over Low power and Lossy networks Working Group, http://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/roll/charter. Last visited: 2016-01-30
  31. 31.
    Mulligan G (2007) The 6lowpan architecture. In: Inproceedings of the 4th Workshop on Embedded Networked Sensors, ser, EmNets ’07. New York, NY, USA: ACM, pp 78–82Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Bandyopadhyay S, Sengupta M, Maiti S, Dutta S (2011) A survey of middleware for Internet of Things, vol 162Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    LinkSmart (2015) LinkSmart middleware platform, http://iot.eclipse.org. Last visited: 2016-04-15
  34. 34.
    OPENIoT (2015) OPENIoT—open source cloud solution for the Internet of Things, http://openiot.eu. Last visited: 2016-01-30
  35. 35.
    IoT-Eclipse, IoT Eclipse - Open Source for IoT, http://iot.eclipse.org, 2015, Last visited: 2016-05-15
  36. 36.
    Sköldström P, Sonkoly B, Gulyás A, Németh F, Kind M, Westphal F-J, John W, Garay J, Jacob E, Jocha D, Elek J, Szabó R, Tavernier W, Agapiou G, Manzalini A, Rost M, sarrar N, Schmid S (2014) Towards unified programmability of cloud and carrier infrastructure,Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Chowdhury NMK, Boutaba R (2010) A survey of network virtualization. Comput Netw 54(5):862–876CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Gomes RL, Bittencourt LF, Madeira ER, Cerqueira E, Gerla M (2016) Bandwidth-aware allocation of resilient virtual software-efined networks. Comput Netw 100(5):179–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ben Jemaa F, Pujolle G, Pariente M (2016) Cloudlet and NFV-based carrier Wi-Fi architecture for a wider range of services. Ann Telecommun:1–8Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wei W, De S, Toenjes R, Reetz E, Moessner K (2012) A comprehensive ontology for knowledge representation in the Internet of Things. In: IEEE 11th International Conference on Trust, Security and Privacy in Computing and Communications (TrustCom). Liverpol England: IEEE, pp 1793–1798Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Akusok A, Bjork KM, Miche Y, Lendasse A (2015) High-performance extreme learning machines: a complete toolbox for big data applications. Access, IEEE 3:1011–1025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Palattella MR, Accettura N, Vilajosana X, Watteyne T, Grieco LA, Boggia G, Dohler M (2013) Standardized protocol stack for the Internet of (important) Things. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 15(3):1389–1406CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institut Mines-Télécom and Springer-Verlag France 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Informatics EngineeringUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal

Personalised recommendations