FLIP: a flexible protocol for efficient communication between heterogeneous devices

Abstract

Interconnecting heterogeneous devices, that is, devices with varying capabilities, has raised new challenges in the design of network protocols. This paper describes the design of the Flexible Interconnecting Protocol, or FLIP, whose goal is to interconnect heterogeneous devices. FLIP is a jlexible protocol that addresses the needs of heterogeneous networks: it incurs little overhead when run by siniple devices, while still providing a range of functions that can be pegormed by more sophisticated devices.We describe a simpliJ5ed implementation of FLIP under Linux. We also conducted a preliminary evaluation of FLIP's overhead and functionality in the context of IP (IPv4 and IPv6) and sensor network environments. FLIP incurs reasonably low overhead when providing IPv4 and IPv6 functionality (1 and 3 bytes respectively), yet it does particularly well in the case of small payloads. When compared to a sensor-specijic protocol, FLIP incurs a small overhead increase while still providing full protocol@nctionality.

Context-aware protocol engines for ad hoc networks

“…Most of the attention was given to the overhead of Transmission Control Protocol (TCP), User Datagram Protocol (UDP), and IP in ad hoc networks [3,4]. What is most striking about all the approaches to date is the continued assumption of a layered-protocol architecture based on in-band, in-packet signaling in which one layer encapsulates the higher layer, and all protocol headers are included in each packet.…”

Facilitating Network Auto Configuration in Next Generation Internet Protocols

“…RELATED WORK Solis and Obraczka [12] designed the Flexible Interconnecting Protocol, or FLIP, whose main goal is to accommodate devices with varying power, processing, and communication capabilities. This is the only previously published work that we are aware of which is similar to NP++.…”

Context-aware packet switching in ad hoc networks

“…Header compression or compaction approaches are based on at least one of the following observations: (a) many header fields of packets in the packet stream of an end-to-end session are the same (e.g., source and destination address, ports, version, protocol, flow label, hop limit), (b) nodes can use local identifiers instead of globally unique identifiers provided that they maintain a mapping for them, and (c) protocol headers unnecessarily carry all the fields that the processing of a packet may require. Most of the attention has been given to the overhead of TCP, UDP, and IP in ad hoc networks [7]- [10]. What is most striking about all the approaches to date on compaction and compression is that they all assume a layered protocol architecture based on in-band in-packet signaling in which one layer encapsulates the higher layer and all protocol headers are included in each packet.…”