170 likes | 362 Views
ITU Workshop on the “ Internet of Things - Trend and Challenges in Standardization ” (Geneva, Switzerland, 18 February 2014). Lightweight Architecture and Protocols for the Internet of Things. Laurent TOUTAIN, Associate Professor, IMT/Télécom Bretagne Laurent.Toutain@telecom-bretagne.eu.
E N D
ITU Workshop on the “Internet of Things - Trend and Challenges in Standardization” (Geneva, Switzerland, 18 February 2014) Lightweight Architecture and Protocols for the Internet of Things Laurent TOUTAIN, Associate Professor, IMT/Télécom Bretagne Laurent.Toutain@telecom-bretagne.eu
Institut Mines-Télécom National coverage 10 GRADUATE SCHOOLS : 6 MINES AND 4 TÉLÉCOM Mines Albi-Carmaux - Albi, Saint-Dié Mines Alès - Alès, Montpellier, Nimes, Pau Mines Douai - Douai Mines Nantes - Nantes Mines ParisTech - Paris, Palaiseau-Saclay, Evry, Fontainebleau, Sophia Antipolis Mines Saint-Etienne - Saint-Etienne, Gardanne Télécom Bretagne - Brest, Rennes, Toulouse Télécom Ecole de Management -Evry, Palaiseau-Saclay, Paris Télécom ParisTech - Paris, Sophia Antipolis Télécom SudParis - Evry Lille Douai Rouen Paris Nancy Palaiseau-Saclay Brest Strasbourg Rennes Evry Fontainebleau Saint-Dié 2SUBSIDIARY SCHOOLS Eurecom- Sophia Antipolis Télécom Lille1 -Lille 1 STRATEGIC PARTNER SCHOOL Mines Nancy - Nancy, Saint-Dié Nantes Clermont-Ferrand 11 ASSOCIATED SCHOOLS ENSEEIHT -Toulouse Enseirb-Matmeca-Bordeaux ENSG - Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy ENSIIE -Evry ESIGELEC-Rouen Grenoble Ecole de Management - Grenoble IFMA - Clermont-Ferrand Sup’Com Tunis -Tunis Télécom Nancy - Villers-lès-Nancy Télécom Physique Strasbourg -Strasbourg Télécom Saint-Etienne -Saint-Etienne Saint-Etienne Bordeaux Grenoble Alès Albi Pau Sophia Antipolis Nimes Toulouse Montpellier Gardanne Tunis
Key figures Institut Mines-Télécom 10 schools 2 subsidiary schools 2 strategic partners 11 associated schools 12,555 students 1,725 PhD students +4000 graduates per year Including over 2,500 engineers 8% engineering degrees issued in France 32 % foreign students 38 % grant holders 4, 800 staff members 2 Carnot Institutes €121 M research-generated income per year Near 100 business start-ups per year at the schools’ incubators Total 2012 Figures excluding associated schools and Mines Nancy (Université de Lorraine)
Internet Architecture Model • Very successful for almost 30 years • Connecting almost everything • Flexible • On top of many links • Low speed, high speed, variable latencies • Large variety of applications • File transfer, streaming, voip,…
Few protocols Steve Deering The Evolution of Layered Protocol Stacks Leads to an Hourglass-Shaped Architecture Saamer Akhshabi, Constantine Dovrolis Sigcomm 2011
Internet Protocol • Interoperability, • But ossification. Steve Deering
IP is: • Packet Format • Management • Interoperability • Forwarding P4 ≠P6 P IP • Addresses • Allocation • Display • Routing A4 ≠A6 A R4=R6 R
New areas for Networking • Internet of Things • Cheap • Moore’s law reduces costs, does not increase power • Low Memory • Low Energy • Different Time cycle • Legacy devices • 20 year lifetime
IPv6 • IPv6 slowly introduced • P6≠P4, A6≠A4: No interoperability • Metcalfe’s law against IPv6 • Forwarding is not the most difficult part • IPv6 has advantages for IoT • Auto-configuration • Simpler • Layer 2 agnostic • But difficult to make IPv6 evolve
Constraints IoT Deployed IPv6 6LoWPAN • Header Compression • M-U capabilities • Fragmentation • P6LP = PIPv6 • A6LP = AIPv6
ARESA2 Project • ANR Verso 2009 project • Urban Wireless Sensor Networks • AMI, Smart Grid, M2M. . . • One of the challenges: IPv6 • Mesh network. • Minimize code footprint, minimize energy consumption.
Reduce 6LoWPAN impact • Toward a flexible 6LoWPAN • Simplify addresses allocation • A6LP ⊂ AIPv6 • Forwarding based on 6LoWPAN • Add functionalities for WSN • P6LP ⊃ PIPv6 • Maintain end to end capabilities • Need for “local” information • IPv6 remains universal format • Multi-homing
Architecture Core WSN GW IPv6 6LoWPAN Extension Core WSN GW IPv6 6LoWPAN + parameters
Conclusions and Recommendations • New constraints: • A single protocol cannot cover all needs • Introduce more flexibility • “a la IEEE” • Core protocols/Fringe protocols • Other alternatives: • REST, but less generic in term of traffic
Reasearch on IoT at Télécom Bretagne • OCIF research team: • Architecture: • Internet evolution, REST, M2M, • Access Network: • NAN, Long Range Radio, community network,… • Context Awareness: • Security, … • Models: • Game Theory, Peak Erasing,… • Application domains: • ITS, SmartGrid, Smart Clothes,…