Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

LOADng-AT: a novel practical implementation of hybrid AHP-TOPSIS algorithm in reactive routing protocol for intelligent IoT-based networks

  • Published:
The Journal of Supercomputing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite that IoT technology provides a promising future for human life, some significant challenges such as routing, security, low-cost equipment, energy consumption, privacy, and reliability can considerably affect its performance. In recent studies, routing has been considered as one of the most critical challenges in IoT due to many existing IoT devices in a network. Selecting a non-optimal path increases collision probability and packet latency which sharply reduces the network performance. Hence, a novel flexible, scalable, and efficient routing protocol named LOADng-AT has been introduced in this study to overcome this challenge. Using LOADng-AT, firstly, taking advantage of the hello message, information about link quality parameters up to two hops is exchanged among nodes. This information includes various parameters such as bi-/unidirectional links, ETX, number of neighbors, link stability, received and residual energy, and SINR, gathered by hello message. Secondly, considering those parameters simultaneously, LOADng-AT efficiently chooses the best possible route based on the hybrid AHP-TOPSIS algorithm. The proposed protocol considerably decreases the RREQ broadcast storm. Moreover, it supports an error recovery path without rerunning a new routing process that noticeably decreases the network routing delay. LOADng-AT can be easily adapted to any QoS parameter with very low complexity which is very important for a delay-sensitive IoT-based network. Finally, in case of noisy condition, the proposed protocol can be efficiently used in low-quality links. Simulation results based on several scenarios in the OMNET ++  simulator show that end-to-end delay (EED) and packet delivery ratio (PDR) parameters significantly improved in the proposed method compared to other similar methods. In other words, using LOADng-AT, the mean values of PDR parameter were 98.64 and 82 percent for network sizes 400 × 200 and 800 × 400 m2, respectively, while the mean values of EED were 0.001 and 0.018 for network sizes 400 × 200 and 800 × 400 m2, respectively. The overall improvement for PDR and EED parameters in all 60 considered scenarios compared to similar methods were 82.26 and 16.6 percent, respectively.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Butler JG (2012) A history of information technology and systems. Univ Arizona

  2. Suresh P, Parthasarathy C, Aswathy RH (2014) A state of the art review on the Internet of Things (IoT). Int Geol Rev 8(6):665–675. https://doi.org/10.1080/00206816609474324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Khanna A, Kaur S (2019) Evolution of Internet of Things (IoT) and its significant impact in the field of precision agriculture. Comput Electron Agric 157:218–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2018.12.039

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Nord JH, Koohang A, Paliszkiewicz J (2019) The Internet of Things: review and theoretical framework. Expert Syst Appl 133:97–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.05.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Manikandan R, Patan R, Gandomi AH, Sivanesan P, Kalyanaraman H (2020) Hash polynomial two factor decision tree using IoT for smart health care scheduling. Exp Syst Appl 141:112924. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2019.112924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. El-shafeiy E, Sallam KM, Chakrabortty RK, Abohany AA (2021) A clustering based Swarm Intelligence optimization technique for the Internet of Medical Things. Exp Syst Appl 173(114648):1–6

    Google Scholar 

  7. Willis TH, Proud LA, and McClellan MS (2020) Real-time object identification and tracking network. U.S. Pat Appl 16/359

  8. Javed F, Afzal MK, Sharif M, Kim B-S (2018) Internet of Things (IoT) operating systems support, networking technologies, applications, and challenges: a comparative review. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 20(3):2062–2100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Gu J, Liu C, Zhuang Y (2020) Dynamic measurement and data calibration for aerial mobile IoT. IEEE Internet Things J 7(6):5210–5219

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tawalbeh L, Muheidat F, Tawalbeh M, Quwaider M (2020) IoT privacy and security: challenges and solutions. Appl Sci 10(12):1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/APP10124102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Sennan S, Balasubramaniyam S, and Luhach AK (2019) Energy and delay aware data aggregation in routing protocol for Internet of Things. Sensors (Switzerland), [Online]. Available: www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors

  12. Čolaković A, Hadžialić M (2018) Internet of Things (IoT): a review of enabling technologies, challenges, and open research issues. Comput Netw 144:17–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2018.07.017

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Palattella MR et al (2016) Internet of Things in the 5G Era: enablers, architecture, and business models. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 34(3):510–527. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSAC.2016.2525418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wu Q, Ding G, Du Z, Sun Y, Jo M, Vasilakos AV (2016) A cloud-based architecture for the internet of spectrum devices over future wireless networks. IEEE Access 4:2854–2862. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2016.2576286

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Mosko M, Solis I, and Uzun E (2014) CCN 1.0 Protocol Architecture

  16. Brogi A, Forti S (2017) QoS-aware deployment of IoT applications through the fog. IEEE Internet Things J 4(5):1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2017.2701408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Huang J, Duan Q, Zhao Y, Zheng Z, Wang W (2017) Multicast routing for multimedia communications in the Internet of Things. IEEE Internet Things J 4(1):215–224. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2016.2642643

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ghaeini HR, Akbari B, and Barekatain B (2013) An adaptive packet loss recovery method for peer-to-peer video streaming over wireless mesh network. Lect Notes Electr Eng 236:713–721. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-7010-6_80

  19. Barekatain B, Maarof MA, Quintana AA, Ghaeini HR (2013) Performance evaluation of routing protocols in live video streaming over wireless mesh networks. J Teknol Sci Eng 62(1):85–94. https://doi.org/10.11113/jt.v62.1495

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Anand V, Pandey S (2020) New approach of GA–PSO-based clustering and routing in wireless sensor networks. Int J Commun Syst 33(16):1–20. https://doi.org/10.1002/dac.4571

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Farooq MU, Wang X, Hawbani A, Khan A, Ahmed A, and Wedaj FT (2020) TORP: load balanced reliable opportunistic routing for asynchronous wireless sensor networks. In: Proc. - 2020 IEEE 19th Int Conf Trust Secur Priv Comput Commun Trust. pp. 1384–1389. https://doi.org/10.1109/TrustCom50675.2020.00186

  22. Taivalsaari A, Mikkonen T (2017) Software challenges in the IoT era. Software 1:72–80. https://doi.org/10.1109/MS.2017.26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Roldán J, Boubeta-Puig J, Luis Martínez J, Ortiz G (2020) Integrating complex event processing and machine learning: an intelligent architecture for detecting IoT security attacks. Exp Syst Appl. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2020.113251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Paper C, Dhumane A, Technical S, and Society E (2016) Routing challenges in Internet of Things, no. March 2015, pp. 1–3

  25. Almusaylim ZA, Alhumam A, Jhanjhi NZ (2020) Proposing a secure RPL based Internet of Things routing protocol: a review. Ad Hoc Netw. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2020.102096

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Jaiswal K, Anand V (2020) EOMR: an energy-efficient optimal multi-path routing protocol to improve QoS in wireless sensor network for IoT applications. Wirel Pers Commun 111(4):2493–2515. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-019-07000-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Sobral JVV, Rodrigues JJPC, Rabêlo RAL, Saleem K, Furtado V (2019) LOADng-IoT: an enhanced routing protocol for internet of things applications over low power networks. Sensors (Switzerland). https://doi.org/10.3390/s19010150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Jaiswal K, Anand V (2021) A Grey-Wolf based optimized clustering approach to improve QoS in wireless sensor networks for IoT applications. Peer-to-Peer Netw Appl 14(4):1943–1962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-021-01099-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Clausen T, Yi J, Herberg U (2017) Lightweight on-demand Ad hoc distance-vector routing - next generation (LOADng): protocol, extension, and applicability. Comput Netw 126:125–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2017.06.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sobral JVV, Rodrigues JJPC, and Neto A (2018) Performance assessment of the LOADng routing protocol in smart city scenarios. 2017 IEEE 1st Summer Sch. Smart Cities, S3C 2017 - Proc., pp. 49–54. https://doi.org/10.1109/S3C.2017.8501394.

  31. Clausen TH, and De Verdiere AC (2011) The LLN On-demand Ad hoc distance-vector routing protocol - next generation ( LOADng ), no. July, pp. 1–75

  32. Clausen T, Yi J, and De Verdiere AC (2012) LOADng: Towards AODV version 2. IEEE Veh Technol Conf, pp. 2–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/VTCFall.2012.6399334

  33. Barekatain B and Bin Maarof MA (2011) Network Coding Efficiency in Live Video Streaming Over Peer-to-Peer Mesh networks. In: 2011 7th Int Conf Inf Technol Asia Emerg Converg Singul Forms - Proc. CITA’11. https://doi.org/10.1109/CITA.2011.5999528

  34. Barekatain B, Khezrimotlagh D, Maarof MA, Quintana AA, Cabrera AT (2017) GAZELLE: an enhanced random network coding based framework for efficient P2P live video streaming over hybrid WMNs. Wirel Pers Commun 95(3):2485–2505. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11277-016-3930-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Sobral JVV, Rodrigues JJPC, Saleem K, Al-Muhtadi J (2016) Performance evaluation of LOADng routing protocol in IoT P2P and MP2P applications. 2016 Int Multidiscip Conf Comput Energy Sci Split. https://doi.org/10.1109/SpliTech.2016.7555943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Yi J, Clausen T, and Bas A (2012) Smart Route Request for on-Demand Route Discovery in Constrained Environments. In: 2012 IEEE Int Conf Wirel Inf Technol Syst ICWITS 2012, no. Lix, pp. 2–5. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICWITS.2012.6417755.

  37. Sasidharan D, Jacob L (2018) Improving network lifetime and reliability for machine type communications based on LOADng routing protocol. Ad Hoc Netw 73:27–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adhoc.2018.02.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Sasidharan D, Jacob L (2018) A framework for the IPv6 based implementation of a reactive routing protocol in ns-3: case study using LOADng. Simul Model Pract Theory 82:32–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2017.12.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Hussain W and Merigo JM (2021) Integrated AHP-IOWA, POWA framework for ideal cloud provider selection and optimum resource management. IEEE Trans Serv Comput

  40. Solangi YA, Longsheng C, Shah SAA (2021) Assessing and overcoming the renewable energy barriers for sustainable development in Pakistan: an integrated AHP and fuzzy TOPSIS approach. Renew Energy 173:209–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2021.03.141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Khatari M, Zaidan A (2021) Multidimensional benchmarking framework for AQMs of network congestion control based on AHP and Group-TOPSIS. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219622021500127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Akram M, Kahraman C, Zahid K (2021) Extension of TOPSIS model to the decision-making under complex spherical fuzzy information. Soft Comput 25(16):10771–10795. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-021-05945-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Winter ET, Thubert EP, Brandt A (2012) RPL: IPv6 routing protocol for low-power and lossy networks. RFC 6550:1–157. https://doi.org/10.17487/RFC6550

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Yi J, Clausen T, and Igarashi Y (2013) Evaluation of Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks: LOADng and RPL. In: 2013 IEEE Conf Wirel Sensor, ICWISE 2013, no. Lix, pp. 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICWISE.2013.6728773.

  45. Yi J, Clausen T (2014) Collection tree extension of reactive routing protocol for low-power and lossy networks. Int J Distrib Sens Netw. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/352421

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Elyengui S, Bouhouchi R, and Ezzedine T (2015) A comparative performance study of the routing protocols RPL, LOADng and LOADng-CTP with bidirectional traffic for AMI scenario, pp. 43–49

  47. A. Bas, J. Yi, and T. Clausen, “Expanding Ring Search for Route Discovery in LOADng Routing Protocol,” Proc. 1st Int. Work. Smart Technol. Energy, Inf. Commun., 2012.

  48. Sobral JVV, Rodrigues JJPC, Kumar N, Zhu C, Ahmad RW (2017) Performance evaluation of routing metrics in the LOADng routing protocol. J Commun Softw Syst 13(2):87–95. https://doi.org/10.24138/jcomss.v13i2.376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Sobral JVV, Rodrigues JJPC, Rabêlo RL, Al-Muhtadi J (2019) Multicast improvement for LOADng in Internet of Things networks. Measurement. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.106931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Marcuzzi F and Tonello AM (2019) Artificial-intelligence-based performance enhancement of the G3-PLC LOADng routing protocol for sensor networks. In: 2019 IEEE Int Symp Power Line Commun its Appl, pp. 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISPLC.2019.8693390

  51. Djamaa B, Senouci MR, Bessas H, Dahmane B, Mellouk A (2021) Efficient and stateless P2P routing mechanisms for the Internet of Things. IEEE Internet Things J 8(14):11400–11414. https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2021.3053339

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Golden BL, Wasil EA, Levy DE (2016) Analytic hierarchy process application in different organisational settings. https://doi.org/10.5772/64511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Hwang CL, Lai YJ, Liu TY (1993) A new approach for multiple objective decision making. Comput Oper Res 20(8):889–899. https://doi.org/10.1016/0305-0548(93)90109-V

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  54. Brunneli M (2015) Introduction to the Analytic Hierarchy Process, 1st edn. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12502-2

    Book  Google Scholar 

  55. Varga A (2005) OMNeT++, discrete event simulation. Serv Des Six Sigma. https://doi.org/10.1002/0471744719.ch14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Perkins C, Belding-Royer E, and Das S (2003) Ad hoc on-demand distance vector (AODV) routing. Exp RFC. https://doi.org/10.16309/j.cnki.issn.1007-1776.2003.03.004

  57. Zhu M, Chang L, Wang N, You I (2020) A smart collaborative routing protocol for delay sensitive applications in industrial IoT. IEEE Access. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2963723

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Yi J, Clausen T, and De Verdiere AC (2012) Efficient data acquisition in sensor networks : introducing LOADng collection tree protocol, pp. 1–4

  59. Clausen T, Yi J, Bas A, and Herberg U (2013) A depth first forwarding (DFF) extension for the LOADng routing protocol. In: Proc - 2013 1st Int Symp Comput Networking, CANDAR 2013, no. Lix, pp. 404–408. https://doi.org/10.1109/CANDAR.2013.72

  60. Sobral JVV, Rodrigues JJPC, Rabêlo RAL, Al-Muhtadi J (2019) Multicast improvement for LOADng in Internet of Things networks. Meas J Int Meas Confed. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.106931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Sobral JVV, Rodrigues JJPC, Rabelo RAL, Saleem K, Kozlov S (2003) Improving the performance of LOADng routing protocol in mobile IoT scenarios. IEEE Access. https://doi.org/10.1109/access.2019.2932718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Gonçalves AJR, Rabêlo RAL, Rodrigues JJPC, Oliveira LML (2020) A mobility solution for low power and lossy networks using the LOADng protocol. Trans Emerg Telecommun Technol. https://doi.org/10.1002/ett.3878

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Khairnar M, Vaishali D, and Kotecha D (2013) Simulation-based performance evaluation of routing protocols in vehicular ad-hoc network. arXiv Prepr

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Computer Engineering, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

    Zakieh Sharifian, Behrang Barekatain, Alfonso Ariza Quintana, Zahra Beheshti & Faramarz Safi-Esfahani

  2. Big Data Research Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

    Behrang Barekatain, Zahra Beheshti & Faramarz Safi-Esfahani

  3. E.T.S.I. Telecomunicación, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain

    Alfonso Ariza Quintana

Authors
  1. Zakieh Sharifian
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Behrang Barekatain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alfonso Ariza Quintana
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zahra Beheshti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Faramarz Safi-Esfahani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Behrang Barekatain.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sharifian, Z., Barekatain, B., Ariza Quintana, A. et al. LOADng-AT: a novel practical implementation of hybrid AHP-TOPSIS algorithm in reactive routing protocol for intelligent IoT-based networks. J Supercomput 78, 9521–9569 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-04256-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-021-04256-8

Keywords