Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

CQARPL: Congestion and QoS-aware RPL for IoT applications under heavy traffic

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

Abstract

The Internet of Things (IoT) provides a common platform to connect the heterogeneous devices over the internet. Hence, the number of devices connected via the internet and consequently congestion is exponentially increased. Congestion reduces the network performance and negatively affects QoS. RPL (routing protocol for low-power and lossy networks) significantly has responded to IoT routing needs, but controlling congestion and QoS needs have been failed to be considered. Therefore, this paper improved the RPL protocol based on the congestion control and QoS requirements and proposed a protocol called Congestion and QoS-Aware RPL for IoT applications (CQARPL). This protocol selects parents based on multi-metric evaluation, considering the conditions of routes to the root. In addition, it somehow controls the parent selection and the children's acceptance that a balanced DODAG graph is formed. Furthermore, it provides the ability to predict congestion and prevents it from occurring as much as possible. The proposed protocol is implemented by the Cooja simulator and evaluated with different scenarios compared to CLRPL and RPL. The simulation results showed that CQARPL maintains the quality of transmissions and controls congestion in IoT.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Samizadeh Nikoui T et al (2021) Internet of Things architecture challenges: a systematic review. Int J Commun Syst 34(4):e4678

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Nord JH, Koohang A, Paliszkiewicz J (2019) The internet of things: review and theoretical framework. Expert Syst Appl 133:97–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Salman T, Jain R (2019) A survey of protocols and standards for internet of things. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.11549

  4. Kushalnagar N, Montenegro G, Schumacher C (2007) IPv6 over low-power wireless personal area networks (6LoWPANs): overview, assumptions, problem statement, and goals

  5. Marietta J, Chandra Mohan B (2020) A review on routing in internet of things. Wirel Pers Commun 111(1):209–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Banh M et al (2015) Performance evaluation of multiple RPL routing tree instances for internet of things applications. In: 2015 International Conference on Advanced Technologies for Communications (ATC)

  7. Winter T et al (2012) RPL: IPv6 routing protocol for low-power and Lossy networks. rfc 6550:1–157

    Google Scholar 

  8. Solapure SS, Kenchannavar HH (2020) Design and analysis of RPL objective functions using variant routing metrics for IoT applications. Wirel Netw 26:4637–4656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Abuein QQ et al (2016) Performance evaluation of routing protocol (RPL) for internet of things. Perform Eval 7(7):17–20

    Google Scholar 

  10. Kim HS et al (2017) Load balancing under heavy traffic in RPL routing protocol for low power and Lossy networks. IEEE Trans Mob Comput 16(4):964–979

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Taghizadeh S, Bobarshad H, Elbiaze H (2018) CLRPL: context-aware and load balancing RPL for IoT networks under heavy and highly dynamic load. IEEE Access 6:23277–23291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Iova O et al (2016) RPL: the routing standard for the Internet of Things... Or Is It? IEEE Commun Mag 54(12):16–22

  13. Martocci J et al (2010) Building automation routing requirements in low-power and Lossy networks. In: Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), 27 p

  14. Gaddour O, Koubâa A (2012) RPL in a nutshell: a survey. Comput Netw 56(14):3163–3178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Lamaazi H, Benamar N (2020) A comprehensive survey on enhancements and limitations of the RPL protocol: a focus on the objective function. Ad Hoc Netw 96:102001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Thubert P (2012) Objective function zero for the routing protocol for low-power and Lossy networks (RPL). In: Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), 14 p

  17. Gnawali O, Levis P (2012) The minimum rank with hysteresis objective function. RFC 6719. In: Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), 13 p

  18. Kharrufa H, Al-Kashoash HAA, Kemp AH (2019) RPL-based routing protocols in IoT applications: a review. IEEE Sens J 19(15):5952–5967

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Ko J et al (2011) Industry: beyond interoperability: pushing the performance of sensor network IP stacks. In: Proceedings of the 9th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems. Association for Computing Machinery, Seattle, pp 1–11

  20. Herberg U, Clausen T (2011) A comparative performance study of the routing protocols LOAD and RPL with bi-directional traffic in low-power and Lossy networks (LLN). In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Wireless Ad Hoc, Sensor, and Ubiquitous Networks. Association for Computing Machinery, Miami, pp 73–80

  21. Sharma D, Shukla A (2014) A comparative study of the routing protocols LOAD and RPL in low-power and Lossy networks (LLN). Sch J Eng Tech 2(1):85–87

    Google Scholar 

  22. Accettura N et al (2011) Performance analysis of the RPL routing protocol. In: 2011 IEEE International Conference on Mechatronics

  23. Halder M et al (2018) Performance analysis of CoAP, 6LoWPAN and RPL routing protocols of IoT using COOJA simulator. Int J Sci Eng Res 9:1671–1677

    Google Scholar 

  24. Pancaroglu D, Sen S (2021) Load balancing for RPL-based internet of things: a review. Ad Hoc Netw 116:102491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Qasem M et al (2015) Performance evaluation of RPL objective functions. In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Computer and Information Technology; Ubiquitous Computing and Communications; Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing; Pervasive Intelligence and Computing

  26. Sankar S, Srinivasan P (2018) Fuzzy logic based energy aware routing protocol for internet of things. Int J Intell Syst Appl 10(10):11

    Google Scholar 

  27. Lamaazi H, Benamar N (2018) OF-EC: a novel energy consumption aware objective function for RPL based on fuzzy logic. J Netw Comput Appl 117:42–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Bhandari KS, Cho GH (2019) A resource oriented route selection framework using contextual information based on fuzzy logic. Electronics 8(9)

  29. Lamaazi H, Benamar N (2017) RPL enhancement using a new objective function based on combined metrics. In: 2017 13th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC)

  30. Jin Y et al (2011) Expected transmission energy route metric for wireless mesh senor networks. Int J Digit Multimed Broadcast 2011:947396

    Google Scholar 

  31. Musaddiq A et al (2020) Reinforcement learning-enabled cross-layer optimization for low-power and Lossy networks under heterogeneous traffic patterns. Sensors 20(15):1–26. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20154158

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Safaei B, Monazzah AMH, Ejlali A (2021) ELITE: an elaborated cross-layer RPL objective function to achieve energy efficiency in internet-of-things devices. IEEE Internet Things J 8(2):1169–1182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Harshavardhana TG et al (2018) Power control and cross-layer design of RPL objective function for low power and Lossy networks. In: 2018 10th International Conference on Communication Systems & Networks (COMSNETS)

  34. Karkazis P et al (2012) Design of primary and composite routing metrics for RPL-compliant wireless sensor networks. In: 2012 International Conference on Telecommunications and Multimedia (TEMU)

  35. Preeth SSL et al (2020) Efficient parent selection for RPL using ACO and coverage based dynamic trickle techniques. J Ambient Intell Humaniz Comput

  36. Thapar P, Batra U (2018) Implementation of ant colony optimization in routing protocol for internet of things. In: Panda B, Sharma S, Batra U (eds) Innovations in Computational Intelligence: Best Selected Papers of the Third International Conference on REDSET 2016. Springer Singapore, Singapore, pp 151–164

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  37. Saleem A et al (2020) Intelligent learning automata-based objective function in RPL for IoT. Sustain Cities Soc 59:102234

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Aboubakar M et al (2019) Toward intelligent reconfiguration of RPL networks using supervised learning. In: 2019 Wireless Days (WD)

  39. Farooq MO et al (2017) Design and analysis of RPL objective functions for multi-gateway ad-hoc low-power and Lossy networks. Ad Hoc Netw 65:78–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sennan S et al (2019) Energy and delay aware data aggregation in routing protocol for internet of things. Sensors 19(24)

  41. Hassan A et al (2016) Improved routing metrics for energy constrained interconnected devices in low-power and Lossy networks. J Commun Netw 18(3):327–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Yang X et al (2014) Stability metric based routing protocol for low-power and Lossy networks. In: 2014 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC)

  43. Sankar S et al (2020) Energy-aware grid-based data aggregation scheme in routing protocol for agricultural internet of things. Sustain Comput Informatics Syst 28:100422

  44. Airehrour D, Gutierrez JA, Ray SK (2019) SecTrust-RPL: a secure trust-aware RPL routing protocol for internet of things. Futur Gener Comput Syst 93:860–876

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Shreenivas D, Raza S, Voigt T (2017) Intrusion detection in the RPL-connected 6LoWPAN networks. In: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM International Workshop on IoT Privacy, Trust, and Security

  46. Mayzaud A, Badonnel R, Chrisment I (2017) A distributed monitoring strategy for detecting version number attacks in RPL-based networks. IEEE Trans Netw Serv Manag 14(2):472–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Marco PD et al (2013) MAC-aware routing metrics for low power and Lossy networks. In: 2013 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM

  48. Aijaz A, Su H, Aghvami A (2015) CORPL: a routing protocol for cognitive radio enabled AMI networks. IEEE Trans Smart Grid 6(1):477–485

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Yang Z et al (2017) CRB-RPL: a receiver-based routing protocol for communications in cognitive radio enabled smart grid. IEEE Trans Veh Technol 66(7):5985–5994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kechiche I, Bousnina I, Samet A (2019) A novel opportunistic fuzzy logic based objective function for the routing protocol for low-power and Lossy networks. In: 2019 15th International Wireless Communications & Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC)

  51. Gormus S et al (2014) Opportunistic RPL for reliable AMI mesh networks. Wirel Netw 20(8):2147–2164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Rathore MM et al (2018) Real-time secure communication for Smart City in high-speed big data environment. Futur Gener Comput Syst 83:638–652

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Hwang C-L, Yoon K (1981) Methods for multiple attribute decision making. In: Hwang C-L, Yoon K (eds) Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications a state-of-the-art survey. Springer, Berlin, pp 58–191

  54. Dunkels A, Gronvall B, Voigt T (2004) Contiki—a lightweight and flexible operating system for tiny networked sensors. In: 29th Annual IEEE International Conference on Local Computer Networks

  55. Qasem M et al (2016) A new efficient objective function for routing in Internet of Things paradigm. In: 2016 IEEE Conference on Standards for Communications and Networking (CSCN)

  56. Lin M, Kim H, Bahk S (2015) Transmission power control for large scale industrial applications in low power and Lossy networks. In: 2015 International Conference on Information and Communication Technology Convergence (ICTC)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Engineering, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan (Khorasgan) Branch, Isfahan, Iran

    Farzaneh Kaviani & Mohammadreza Soltanaghaei

Authors
  1. Farzaneh Kaviani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammadreza Soltanaghaei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammadreza Soltanaghaei.

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

Kaviani, F., Soltanaghaei, M. CQARPL: Congestion and QoS-aware RPL for IoT applications under heavy traffic. J Supercomput 78, 16136–16166 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-022-04488-2

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11227-022-04488-2

Keywords