2014 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/iscc.2014.6912471
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis and performance evaluation of RPL under mobility

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
51
0
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 61 publications
(52 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
51
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These protocols are the original RPL (OR-RPL), Co-RPL [10], ME-RPL [12], and the reverse trickle timer algorithm (RT-RPL) [11]. We used four performance metrics to evaluate the efficiency of these protocols: (1) packet delivery ratio; (2) number of dropped packets; (3) average end-to-end delay; and (4) number of control packets.…”
Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…These protocols are the original RPL (OR-RPL), Co-RPL [10], ME-RPL [12], and the reverse trickle timer algorithm (RT-RPL) [11]. We used four performance metrics to evaluate the efficiency of these protocols: (1) packet delivery ratio; (2) number of dropped packets; (3) average end-to-end delay; and (4) number of control packets.…”
Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Cobarzan et al [11] proposed a new version of the trickle algorithm (reverse trickle timer) in order to allow mobile nodes to move seamlessly into a routing topology and limit overhead at the same time. They modified DAO by introducing a mobility flag (MF) in order to help other nodes identify mobile nodes.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The authors in [12] proposed analysis of RPL under mobility using a reverse trickle algorithm. According to their proposal, mobile nodes are preconfigured with a mobility flag and are set to act as leaf nodes to make sure they do not participate in the DODAG building process.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Solutions for this case are not specified in the standard nor, to the best of our knowledge, realized in publicly-available reference implementations. Moreover, the under-specification in the standard is a problem also for multipoint-to-point; recent studies (e.g., [8]) show that currently implemented RPL mechanisms fail to rapidly detect when the preferred parent of a mobile node becomes unreachable as it moves, leading to high packet loss.…”
Section: B Mobilitymentioning
confidence: 99%