skip to main content
research-article

Device microagent for IoT home gateway: a lightweight plug-n-play architecture

Published:05 June 2018Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Smart home implementation in IoT involves practical challenges of management and scalability of connecting various non IP end-devices i.e. sensors and actuators behind the connnected home gateway. While there are separate standards for interaction between IoT service to home gateway and gateway to variety of end-devices there remains disconnect regarding how this two ends meet in an adaptable and scalable way. In this paper we present an light-weight, loosly coupled architecture for IoT smart home gateway whereby end-devices can be added dynamically on the gateway without disrupting long haul communication between IoT cloud service and gateway. The gateway agent exchanges data through sensor-block or actuator-block with end-devices via device microagents and the protocol specific read-write task is offloaded to individual device microagent. This hybrid approach to integrate MQTT pub/sub flexibility with LWM2M RESTful adaptability results in a design of plug-n-play modular agent architecture for home gateway management in IoT applications.

References

  1. Open Mobile Alliance. 2011. OMA DM GwMO technical specification. http://www.openmobilealliance.org/release/GwMO/V1_1-20140617-C/OMA-TS-GwMO-V1_1-20140617-C.pdf. (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Open Mobile Alliance. 2017. OMA LWM2M technical specification. http://www.openmobilealliance.org/release/LightweightM2M/V1_0-20170208-A/OMA-TS-LightweightM2M-V1_0-20170208-A.pdf. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Atilaneves. 2013. Go vs D vs Erlang vs C in real life: MQTT broker implementation shootout. https://atilanevesoncode.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/go-vs-d-vs-erlang-vs-c-in-real-life-mqtt-broker-implementation-shootout. (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. L. Atzori, A. Iera, and G. Morabito. 2010. The Internet of Things: A Survey. Computer Networks 54, 15 (Oct. 2010), 2787--2805. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. D. Chattopadhyay and R. Dasgupta. 2012. A Novel Comprehensive Sensor Model for Cyber Physical System: Interoperability for Heterogeneous Sensor. In 6th International Conference on Sensing Technology (ICST). 179--183.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. D. Chattopadhyay, R. Dasgupta, R. Banerjee, and A. Chakroborty. 2012. Event Driven Video Surveillance System using City Cloud. In 47th Annual National Convention of Computer Society Of India (CSI 2012). Mcgrawhill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. D. Chattopadhyay, R. Dasgupta, and A. Pal. 2013. Sensor Data Modeling for Smart Meters --- A Methodology to Compare Different Systems. In Proceedings of the 2013 International Conference on Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC '13). IEEE Computer Society, 215--221. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. D. Chattopadhyay, A. Samantaray, and R. HariRaghav. {n. d.}. Lightweight Device Task Actuation Framework as IoT Test Platform. In Internet of Things. IoT Infrastructures: Second International Summit, IoT 360 2015, October 27--29, 2015, Revised Selected Papers, Part II. Springer International Publishing, 20--27.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. M. Collina, G. E. Corazza, and A. Vanelli-Coralli. 2012. Introducing the QEST broker: Scaling the IoT by bridging MQTT and REST. In 2012 IEEE 23rd International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications - (PIMRC). 36--41.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. ESR Consortium. 2017. LWM2M over MQTT profile specification. http://e-s-r.net/download/specification/ESR030-LWM2M-MQTT-1.0-A.pdf. (2017).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. S. Duttagupta, M. Kumar, R. Ranjan, and M. Nambiar. 2016. Performance Prediction of IoT Application: an Experimental Analysis. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on the Internet of Things, IOT 2016, Stuttgart, Germany. ACM, 43--51. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Internet Engineering Task Force. 2014. Constrained Application Framework - CoAP. docs.oasis-open.org/mqtt/mqtt/v3.1.1/os/mqtt-v3.1.1-os.pdf. (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. C. Gomez and J. Paradells. 2010. Wireless home automation networks: A survey of architectures and technologies. IEEE Communications Magazine 48 (2010), 92--101. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. IBM. 2013. Message Queuing Telemetry Transport - MQTT v3.1.1. https://www.iso.org/standard/69466.html. (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. S. M. Kim, H. S. Choi, and W. S. Rhee. 2015. IoT home gateway for auto-configuration and management of MQTT devices. In 2015 IEEE Conference on Wireless Sensors (ICWiSe). 12--17.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. J.F. Kingman. 1960. The single server queue in heavy traffic. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 57, 4 (1960), 902--904.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. T. Levä, O. Mazhelis, and H. Suomi. 2014. Comparing the cost-efficiency of CoAP and HTTP in Web of Things applications. Decision Support Systems 63 (2014), 23--38.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. J.D. Little. 1961. A Proof for the Queuing Formula. Operations Research 9, 3 (1961), 383--387. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. P. MISRA, A. Pal, C. BHAUMIK, D. KAR, S. NASKAR, S. ADAK, S. GHOSH, and et al. 2012. A computing platform for development and deployment of sensor data based applications and services. (2012). https://www.google.com/patents/WO2013072925A3?cl=enGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. S. Nicholas. 2012. Power Profiling: HTTPS Long Polling vs. MQTT with SSL, on Android. http://stephendnicholas.com/posts/power-profiling-mqtt-vs-https. (2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. S. Oh, J.H. Kim, and G. Fox. 2010. Real-time Performance Analysis for Publish/Subscribe Systems. Future Generation Computer Systems 26, 3 (March 2010), 318--323. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. F. Renaud. 2016. Performance testing of serialization and deserialization of Java JSON libraries. https://github.com/fabienrenaud/java-json-benchmark. (2016).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. T. R. Sheltami, A.A. Al-Roubaiey, and A.S. Mahmoud. 2016. A Survey on Developing Publish/Subscribe Middleware over Wireless Sensor/Actuator Networks. Wireless Networks 22, 6 (Aug. 2016), 2049--2070. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. A. Sumaray and S. K. Makki. 2012. A Comparison of Data Serialization Formats for Optimal Efficiency on a Mobile Platform. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Ubiquitous Information Management and Communication (ICUIMC). ACM, 48:1--48:6. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. D. Thangavel, X. Ma, A. C. Valera, H.X. Tan, and C.K.Y. Tan. 2014. Performance evaluation of MQTT and CoAP via a common middleware. In 9th International Conference on Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information Processing (ISSNIP),Singapore. IEEE.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. VMWare. 2014. Choosing your messaging protocol AMQP, MQTT or STOMP. https://blogs.vmware.com/vfabric/2013/02/choosing-your-messaging-protocol-amqp-mqtt-or-stomp.html. (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. R. Xia. 2015. Stress testing Mosquitto MQTT Broker. http://rexpie.github.io/2015/08/23/stress-testing-mosquitto.html. (2015).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Device microagent for IoT home gateway: a lightweight plug-n-play architecture

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader