Testing and Evaluation of the Routing Protocol’s effectiveness for LLNs : An Analysis and Study – Part I

Abstract

The idea behind the Internet of Things (IoT) is causing a important expansion of the Internet's volume to gather, examine, and disseminate data that may be used to create information or data. Direct connection between IoT devices of different sorts is presented to create specific environments that are intelligent and self-aware. Many minor devices and low control plans are part of one class of technologies, such as Low Power Lossy Networks (LLNs), which serve as the foundation for the Internet of Things. The Routing Protocol for LLNs (RPL), the central component of the Internet of Things (IoT),To our knowledge, there has not been much done in the way of RPL experimentation and assessment. There are a few simulation tools available that allow for the evaluation of RPL in a realistic deployment environment. In order to grasp RPL's role in the Internet of Things, this study focuses on understanding its architecture and protocol stack. Regarding performance parameters like packet delivery ratio, latency, signaling overhead, and energy usage, simulations in the Contiki OS Cooja simulator are used to test RPL's performance in a hypothetical Smart Health setting. The simulation findings demonstrate that the RPL has demonstrated several appropriate properties that may make it beneficial for wider scale deployments. A collection of mobile nodes connected by wireless links to create a temporary network without a predetermined topology, centralized access point, or infrastructure is known as a mobile Adhoc network. Each node in such a network has the ability to serve as both a router and a host simultaneously, and it is free to quit or join the network as necessary. This study has already covered several routing protocols, but it will now compare two reactive protocols—DSR and AODV—as well as one proactive protocol, DSDV. When using position-based routing, a thorough analysis of the network's performance, including throughput, overhead, delay, and pause time, is performed. Variable simulation times are used to investigate performance variations as mobility and location inaccuracy have an impact on node performance. With the help of the NS-2vvsimulator, the simulations are run. The findings highlight how critical it is to carefully consider and execute routing methods in an ad hoc setting. The Low power and Lossy Networks for the Smart Grid require a robust routing protocol. The procedures are castoff to forward data, which contains facts gathering, information distribution, and other activities. In order to understand their advantages and disadvantages, this study compares RPL and LOAD, the two primary routing protocols for Low-powerv and Lossy Networks. Based on an examination of the specification and experimental data, observations are made on the routing overhead, traffic patterns, resource requirements, fragmentation, and other aspects of the protocol. The performance of various traffic patterns, such as sensor-to-sensor, sensor-to-root, and root-to-sensor bidirectional traffic, is further investigated using simulations. The readers might pick the most suitable protocol for their intended applications by assessing various protocols in order to have a better grasp of their applicability. There have been some studies published in the literature evaluating the performance of suggested routing protocols under CBR traffic with various network conditions, but little attention has been paid to evaluating their performance when applied to traffic generators other than CBR, such as FTP, TELNET, etc. The complexity of traffic in actual applications is not reflected by CBR traffic, and the traffic scenarios described here are more like the network loads experienced by MANETs in the real world. This article examines the performance of the three routing protocols AODV, DSR, and WRP for FTP, TELNET, and CBR traffic in terms of packet delivery ratio, throughput, average end-to-end delay, and routing message overhead. Many network circumstances are considered, including the effects of modifying the halt length and the quantity of source destinations. For the consolidation and centralization of the public safety network's main services, it is essential to assess which routing protocol provides the best performance and throughput in a mission-critical setting. The following routing protocols are evaluated: Routing Information Protocol (RIP), Open Shortest Path First (OSPF), Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (IGRP), and Enhanced Interior Gateway Routing Protocol (EGIRP). Convergence, throughput, and queuing delay are also evaluated. The network is simulated using Riverbed Modeler Academic Edition 17.5vv. According to a study of the results, which procedure should be utilized.