The Role of the Internet of Things in Network Resilience

  • Hauke Petersen
  • Emmanuel Baccelli
  • Matthias Wählisch
  • Thomas C. Schmidt
  • Jochen Schiller
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 151)


Disasters lead to devastating structural damage not only to buildings and transport infrastructure, but also to other critical infrastructure, such as the power grid and communication backbones. Following such an event, the availability of minimal communication services is however crucial to allow efficient and coordinated disaster response, to enable timely public information, or to provide individuals in need with a default mechanism to post emergency messages. The Internet of Things consists in the massive deployment of heterogeneous devices, most of which battery-powered, and interconnected via wireless network interfaces. In this paper, we argue that the vast deployment of IoT-enabled devices could bring benefits in terms of data network resilience in face of disaster. Leveraging their spontaneous wireless networking capabilities, IoT devices could enable minimal communication services (e.g. emergency micro-message delivery) while the conventional communication infrastructure is out of service. We identify the main challenges that must be addressed in order to realize this potential in practice. These challenges concern various technical aspects, including physical connectivity requirements, network protocol stack enhancements, data traffic prioritization schemes, as well as social and political aspects.


Design of resilient IoT infrastructures IoT for crisis and emergency response 



This work was partially supported by ANR and BMBF within the SAFEST and Peeroskop projects, by the EU within the geocrowd project, and the DAAD within the guest lecture program.


  1. 1.
    Atzori, L., Iera, A., Morabito, G.: The internet of things: a survey. Comput. Netw. 54(15), 2787–2805 (2010)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baccelli, E., Mehlis, C., Hahm, O., Schmidt, T.C., Wählisch, M.: Information centric networking in the IoT: experiments with NDN in the wild. In: Proceedings of 1st ACM Conference on Information-Centric Networking (ICN 2014), pp. 77–86. ACM, New York, September 2014Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Baldwin, J., Ewert, J., Yamen, S.: Evolution of the voice interconnect. Ericsson Review 88, 10–15 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cordero, J., Yi, J., Clausen, T., Baccelli, E.: Enabling multihop communication in spontaneous wireless networks. In: ACM SIGCOMM eBook on Recent Advances in Networking, ch. 9, vol. 1, pp. 413–457. ACM (2013)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ericsson: More than 50 billion devices. Technical report, Ericsson White Paper (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gupta, P., Kumar, P.: The capacity of wireless networks. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 46(2), 388–404 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lien, Y.N., Jang, H.C., Tsai, T.C.: A manet based emergency communication and information system for catastrophic natural disasters. In: 29th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops, ICDCS Workshops 2009, pp. 412–417. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Onwuka, E., Folaponmile, A., Ahmed, M.: Manet: a reliable network in disaster areas. J. Res. Nat. Dev. 9(2), 105–113 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Palen, L., Liu, S.B.: Citizen communications in crisis: anticipating a future of ICT-supported public participation. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI, pp. 727–736. ACM, New York (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Seedorf, J., Arumaithurai, M., Tagami, A., Ramakrishnan, K., Blefari-Melazzi, N.: Using ICN in disaster scenarios. Internet-Draft - work in progress 02, IETF, June 2014Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shimoda, K., Gyoda, K.: Analysis of ad hoc network performance for disaster communication models. In: 2011 10th International Symposium on Autonomous Decentralized Systems (ISADS), pp. 483–488. IEEE (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sundmaeker, H., Guillemin, P., Friess, P., Woelffle, S.: Vision and challenges for realising the internet of things. Cluster of European Research Projects on the Internet of Things, European Commision (2010)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Umedu, T., Urabe, H., Tsukamoto, J., Sato, K., Higashinoz, T.: A manet protocol for information gathering from disaster victims. In: Fourth Annual IEEE International Conference on Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops, PerCom Workshops 2006, p. 5. IEEE (2006)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Vermesan, O., Friess, P., Guillemin, P., Gusmeroli, S., Sundmaeker, H., Bassi, A., Jubert, I.S., Mazura, M., Harrison, M., Eisenhauer, M., et al.: Internet of things strategic research roadmap. In: Vermesan, O., Friess, P., Guillemin, P., Gusmeroli, S., Sundmaeker, H., Bassi, A., et al. (eds.) Internet of Things: Global Technological and Societal Trends, vol. 1, pp. 9–52 (2011)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hauke Petersen
    • 1
  • Emmanuel Baccelli
    • 2
  • Matthias Wählisch
    • 1
  • Thomas C. Schmidt
    • 3
  • Jochen Schiller
    • 1
  1. 1.Freie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany
  2. 2.INRIAValbonneFrance
  3. 3.HAW HamburgHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations