Sub-GHz LPWAN Network Coexistence, Management and Virtualization: An Overview and Open Research Challenges
- 768 Downloads
The IoT domain is characterized by many applications that require low-bandwidth communications over a long range, at a low cost and at low power. Low power wide area networks (LPWANs) fulfill these requirements by using sub-GHz radio frequencies (typically 433 or 868 MHz) with typical transmission ranges in the order of 1 up to 50 km. As a result, a single base station can cover large areas and can support high numbers of connected devices (>1000 per base station). Notorious initiatives in this domain are LoRa, Sigfox and the upcoming IEEE 802.11ah (or “HaLow”) standard. Although these new technologies have the potential to significantly impact many IoT deployments, the current market is very fragmented and many challenges exists related to deployment, scalability, management and coexistence aspects, making adoption of these technologies difficult for many companies. To remedy this, this paper proposes a conceptual framework to improve the performance of LPWAN networks through in-network optimization, cross-technology coexistence and cooperation and virtualization of management functions. In addition, the paper gives an overview of state of the art solutions and identifies open challenges for each of these aspects.
KeywordsSub-GHz networks LPWAN LoRa SigFox IEEE 802.11ah DASH7 Coexistence Network management Virtualization Scalability QoS Energy efficiency
This work was carried out in the context of following projects. IDEAL-IoT (Intelligent DEnse And Longe range IoT networks) is an SBO project funded by the Fund for Scientific Research-Flanders (FWO-V) under Grant Agreement #S004017N. ‘Processing visual sensor data in low-power wide area networks’ is a project funded by the Fund for Scientific Research-Flanders (FWO-V) under Grant Agreement #G084177N. The UGent GOA “Disposable and biodegradable wireless networks for extreme conditions” project. The H2020 eWINE project under Grant Agreement Number 688116.
- 1.(2015). LoRaWAN: What is it? A technical overview of LoRa and LoRaWAN, a technical overview of LoRa and LoRaWAN, LoRa Alliance Technical Marketing Workgroup 1.0.Google Scholar
- 2.WG802.11—Wireless LAN Working Group, 802.11ah-2016—IEEE Approved Draft Standard for Information Technology. https://standards.ieee.org/findstds/standard/802.11ah-2016.html. February 2017 release.
- 4.Tian, L., Famaey, J., & Latré, L. (2016). Evaluation of the IEEE 802.11ah restricted access window mechanism for dense IoT networks. In IEEE international symposium on a world of wireless, mobile and multimedia networks (WoWMoM).Google Scholar
- 5.Chang, K. H., & Mason, B. (2012). The IEEE 802.15.4g standard for smart metering utility networks. In 2012 IEEE third international conference on smart grid communications, Tainan (pp. 476–480).Google Scholar
- 7.Watteyne, T., Mehta, A., & Pister, K. (2009). Reliability through frequency diversity: Why channel hopping makes sense. In 6th ACM symposium on performance evaluation of wireless ad hoc, sensor, and ubiquitous networks.Google Scholar
- 9.Weyn, M. (2016). Low power wide area networks. Last accessed May 18, 2016, from https://sites.google.com/a/wesdec.be/mweyn/lpwan.
- 10.Daneels, G., Famaey, J., Bohez, S., Simoens, P., & Latré, S. (2015). Upstream content scheduling in Wi-Fi densenets during large-scale events. In IEEE globecom workshop on enabling technologies in future wireless local area networks (ETFWLAN).Google Scholar
- 11.Zats, S., Su, R., Watteyne, T., & Pister, K. S. J. (2011). Scalability of time synchronized wireless sensor networking. In 37th Annual conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics Society (pp. 3011–3016).Google Scholar
- 12.Palattella, M. R., Accettura, N., Dohler, M., Grieco, L. A., & Boggia, G. (2012). Traffic aware scheduling algorithm for reliable low-power multi-hop IEEE 802.15.4e networks. In IEEE 23rd international symposium on personal, indoor and mobile radio communications - (PIMRC) (pp. 327–332). doi: 10.1109/PIMRC.2012.6362805
- 13.Dujovne, D., et al. (2014). 6TiSCH on-the-fly scheduling. Internet-Draft [work-in-progress], IETF Std., Rev. draft-dujovne-6tisch-on-the-fly-02, Feb 14, 2014.Google Scholar
- 14.Tian, L., Latré, L., & Famaey, J. (2016). Implementation and validation of an IEEE 802.11ah module for NS-3. In Workshop on ns-3 (WNS3).Google Scholar
- 16.Qutab-ud-din, M., Hazmi, A., Badihi, B., Larmo, A., Torsner, J., & Valkama, M. (2015). Performance analysis of IoT-enabling IEEE 802.11ah technology and its RAW mechanism with non-cross slot boundary holding schemes. In IEEE 16th international symposium on a world of wireless, mobile and multimedia networks (WoWMoM).Google Scholar
- 17.Park, M. (2014). IEEE 802.11ah: Energy efficient MAC protocols for long range wireless LAN. In IEEE international conference on communications (ICC) (pp. 2388–2393).Google Scholar
- 22.Yang, M., Jin, Y., Zeng, L., Wu, X., & Vasilakos, A. (2015). Software-defined and virtualized future mobile and wireless networks: A survey. Mobile Networks and Applications, 20(4–18), 2015.Google Scholar
- 23.Paventhan, A., Krishna, H., Pahuja, N., Khan, M. F., & Jain, A. (2015). Experimental evaluation of IETF 6TiSCH in the context of smart grid. In IEEE 2nd world forum on internet of things (WF-IoT) (pp. 530–535).Google Scholar
- 24.Duquennoy, S., Al Nahas, B., Landsiedel, O., & Watteyne, T. (2015). Orchestra: Robust mesh networks through autonomously scheduled TSCH. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM conference on embedded networked sensor systems (pp. 337–350).Google Scholar
- 25.Liu, Y.-H., Huang, X., Vidojkovic, M., Ba, A., Harpe, P., Dolmans, G., & Groot, H. D. (2013). A 1.9 nJ/b 2.4 GHz multistandard (bluetooth low energy/zigbee/IEEE802.15.6) transceiver for personal/body-area networks. In ISSCC 2013.Google Scholar
- 27.Fabbro, P. D., et al. (2010). A 0.8 V 2.4 GHz 1 Mb/s GFSK RF transceiver with on-chip DC–DC converter in a standard 0.18 µm CMOS technology. In Proceedings of ESSCIRC, Sept 14–16, 2010. doi: 10.1109/ESSCIRC.2010.5619742.
- 28.Das, K., Mathews, E., Zand, P., Sanchez Ramirez, A., & Havinga, P. Efficient I/O joining and reliable data publication in energy harvested ISA100.11a network. In IEEE international conference on industrial technology (ICIT).Google Scholar
- 31.Pollin, S., Tan, I., Hodge, B., & Bahai, A. (2008). Harmful coexistence between 802.15.4 and 802.11: A measurement-based study. In 3rd international conference on cognitive radio oriented wireless networks and communications (CrownCom 2008) (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
- 32.Lakshminarayanan, K., Sapra, S., Seshan, S., & Steenkiste, P. (2009). Rfdump: An architecture for monitoring the wireless ether. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM international conference on emerging networking experiments and technologies (CoNEXT).Google Scholar
- 33.Hermans, F., Larzon, L.-A., Rensfelt, O., & Gunningberg, P. (2012). A lightweight approach to online detection and classification of interference in 802.15.4-based sensor networks. In ACM SIGBED Review—Special Issue on the 3rd International Workshop on Networks of Cooperating Objects (CONET).Google Scholar
- 34.Zhou, R., Xiong, Y., Xing, G., Sun, L., & Ma, J. (2010). Zifi: Wireless LAN discovery via ZigBee interference signatures. In Proceedings of the sixteenth annual international conference on mobile computing and networking. MobiCom ‘10 (pp. 49–60). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- 35.Rayanchu, S., Patro, A., & Banerjee, S. (2011). Airshark: Detecting non-WiFi RF devices using commodity WiFi hardware. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM conference on internet measurement conference. IMC ’11 ( pp. 137–154). New York: ACM.Google Scholar
- 36.Huang, J., Xing, G., Zhou, G., & Zhou, R. (2010). Beyond co-existence: Exploiting WiFi white space for Zigbee performance assurance. In 18th IEEE international conference on network protocols (pp. 305–314).Google Scholar
- 40.Hayashi, H. (2015). Standardization of wireless coexistence in industrial automation. In 2015 54th Annual conference of the Society of Instrument and Control Engineers of Japan (SICE) (pp. 968–973).Google Scholar
- 43.Chebrolu, K., & Dhekne, A. (2009). Esense: Communication through energy sensing. In Proceedings of the 15th annual international conference on mobile computing and networking (MobiCom ‘09) (pp. 85–96). New York, NY: ACM.Google Scholar
- 44.Fischer, A., Botero, J., Till Beck, M., de Meer, H., & Hesselbach, X. (2013). Virtual network embedding: A survey. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 15(4).Google Scholar
- 45.Lin, T., Bannazadeh, H., & Leon-Garcia, A. (2015). Introducing wireless access programmability using software-defined infrastructure. In IFIP/IEEE international symposium on integrated network management (IM) (pp. 585–591).Google Scholar
- 47.Pelov, A., Toutain, L., & Delibie, Y. (2016). Constrained signaling over LP-WAN. Internet Engineering Task Force draft. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-pelov-core-cosol-01. Feb 17, 2016.
- 48.Van den Abeele, F., Hoebeke, J., Moerman, I., & Demeester, P. (2014). Fine-grained management of CoAP interactions with constrained IoT devices. In IEEE/IFIP network operations and management symposium, proceedings (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
- 49.Bonomi, F., et al. (2012). Fog computing and its role in the internet of things. In Proceedings of the first edition of the MCC workshop on mobile cloud computing (pp. 13–16). Helsinki: ACM.Google Scholar
- 50.Hu, Y. C., Patel, M., Sabella, D., Sprecher, N., & Young, V. (2015). Mobile edge computing—A key technology towards 5G. ETSI White Paper (11).Google Scholar
- 51.Baldo, N., Tamma, B. R., Manoj, B., Rao, R., & Zorzi, M. (2009). A neural network based cognitive controller for dynamic channel selection. In IEEE international conference on communications, 2009. ICC’09 (pp. 1–5). IEEE.Google Scholar
- 54.Compton, R., Mehari, M. T., Colbourn, C. J., De Poorter, E., & Syrotiuk, V. R. (2016). Screening interacting factors in a wireless network testbed using locating arrays. In The international workshop on computer and networking experimental research, IEEE conference on computer communications workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS).Google Scholar
- 55.Munawar, W., Alizai, M. H., Landsiedel, O., & Wehrle, K. (2010). Dynamic TinyOS: Modular and transparent incremental code-updates for sensor networks. In IEEE ICC 2010, May 23–27.Google Scholar
- 56.Marrón, P. J., Gauger, M., Lachenmann, A., Minder, D., Saukh, O., & Rothermel, K. (2006). FlexCup: A flexible and efficient code update mechanism for sensor networks. In EWSN 2006, Feb 13–15.Google Scholar