Support Context-Adaptation in the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP)

  • Yuji Dong
  • Kaiyu WanEmail author
  • Yong Yue
  • Xin Huang
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11434)


The number of interconnected smart devices has already rapidly increased, and the Internet of Things (IoT) has presented tremendous potential in various domains such as smart cities, healthcare and industrial automation. To integrate the IoT applications to Web to utilise the advantages of Internet infrastructures, the Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) is proposed as one of the standardised protocols for IoT applications. However, the REST architecture style, which is the foundation of Web, was not designed for IoT applications and thus cannot satisfy all the requirements of IoT applications. To efficiently monitor the IoT resources asynchronously, the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) extended the CoAP with Resource Observe mechanism. However, the Resource Observe mechanism benefits sensors rather than actuators. For the actuator resources, the CoAP cannot support the context-adaptation, and therefore it cannot always correctly estimate system states and handle complex physical behaviours. In this paper, we extend the CoAP with a context-adaptation mechanism to enrich the system states estimation and other operations in the protocol level for physical behaviour modelling and implementation. The extended mechanism is implemented in the Californium (CF) framework.


Context-adaptation CoAP Internet of Things 


  1. 1.
    Bormann, C., Castellani, A.P., Shelby, Z.: Coap: an application protocol for billions of tiny internet nodes. IEEE Internet Comput. 16(2), 62–67 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bucchiarone, A., De Sanctis, M., Marconi, A., Pistore, M., Traverso, P.: Design for adaptation of distributed service-based systems. In: Barros, A., Grigori, D., Narendra, N.C., Dam, H.K. (eds.) ICSOC 2015. LNCS, vol. 9435, pp. 383–393. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camara, J., Canal, C., Salaün, G.: Behavioural self-adaptation of services in ubiquitous computing environments. SEAMS 9, 28–37 (2009)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cubo, J., Canal, C., Pimentel, E.: Model-based dependable composition of self-adaptive systems. Informatica 35, 51–62 (2011)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Lemos, R., et al.: Software engineering for self-adaptive systems: a second research roadmap. In: de Lemos, R., Giese, H., Müller, H.A., Shaw, M. (eds.) Software Engineering for Self-Adaptive Systems II. LNCS, vol. 7475, pp. 1–32. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dong, Y., Wan, K., Yue, Y.: A feedback-based adaptive service-oriented paradigm for the internet of things. In: Braubach, L., et al. (eds.) ICSOC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10797, pp. 137–148. Springer, Cham (2018). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fielding, R., et al.: Hypertext transfer protocol-http/1.1. Tech. rep. (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fielding, R.T.: Architectural styles and the design of network-based software architectures. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Irvine (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gubbi, J., Buyya, R., Marusic, S., Palaniswami, M.: Internet of things (IOT): a vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Future Gener. Comput. Syst 29(7), 1645–1660 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guinard, D., Trifa, V., Wilde, E.: A resource oriented architecture for the web of things. In: Internet of Things (IOT) 2010, pp. 1–8. IEEE (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hartke, K.: Observing resources in the constrained application protocol (CoAP) (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kovatsch, M., Lanter, M., Shelby, Z.: Californium: scalable cloud services for the internet of things with CoAP. In: 2014 International Conference on the Internet of Things (IOT), pp. 1–6. IEEE (2014)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kuladinithi, K., Bergmann, O., Pötsch, T., Becker, M., Görg, C.: Implementation of CoAP and its application in transport logistics. In: Proceedings IP+ SN, Chicago, IL, USA (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Raza, S., Shafagh, H., Hewage, K., Hummen, R., Voigt, T.: Lithe: lightweight secure coap for the internet of things. IEEE Sens. J. 13(10), 3711–3720 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Seiger, R., Huber, S., Heisig, P., Assmann, U.: Enabling self-adaptive workflows for cyber-physical systems. In: Schmidt, R., Guédria, W., Bider, I., Guerreiro, S. (eds.) BPMDS/EMMSAD -2016. LNBIP, vol. 248, pp. 3–17. Springer, Cham (2016). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., Bormann, C.: The constrained application protocol (CoAP) (2014)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tanganelli, G., Vallati, C., Mingozzi, E., Kovatsch, M.: Efficient proxying of CoAP observe with quality of service support. In: 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on Internet of Things (WF-IoT), pp. 401–406. IEEE (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Teklemariam, G.K., Van Den Abeele, F., Moerman, I., Demeester, P., Hoebeke, J.: Bindings and restlets: a novel set of coap-based application enablers to build IOT applications. Sensors 16(8), 1217 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhou, J., et al.: Cloudthings: a common architecture for integrating the internet of things with cloud computing. In: 2013 IEEE 17th International Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), pp. 651–657. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK
  2. 2.Xi’an Jiaotong Liverpool UniversitySuzhouChina

Personalised recommendations