Optimizing the Trickle Algorithm

Djamaa, Badis; Richardson, Mark A.

doi:10.1109/lcomm.2015.2408339

Cited by 35 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The trickle timer is used to schedule the control messages and service discovery. The DIO packets are transmitted more frequently if the network is not stable or a new node enters the network to update the DODAG faster [58][59][60].…”

Section: Qwl-rpl Algorithm Implementation and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Routing protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks for heterogeneous traffic network

Musaddiq

Zikria

Zulqarnain

et al. 2020

J Wireless Com Network

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a real network deployment, the diverse sensor applications generate a heterogeneous traffic pattern which may include basic sensing measurements such as temperature readings or high-volume multimedia traffic. In a heterogeneous traffic network, the two standardized objective functions (OFs), i.e., objective function zero (OF0) and the Minimum Rank with Hysteresis Objective Function (MRHOF) for routing protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks (RPL) perform poor routing decisions by selecting an already congested parent node and cause more retransmissions across the network. Therefore, careful consideration is required in designing a new OF for heterogeneous traffic scenarios. In this study, we examine the RPL protocol under a heterogeneous traffic pattern and proposed a new protocol based on queue and workload-based condition (QWL-RPL). The aim of the proposed protocol is to achieve a reliable path with better overall performance. The proposed OF model considers the link workload in addition to mapping the congestion status of the node using the packet queue. We implement the proposed routing model in the Contiki operating system (OS) Cooja environment to compare with the existing technique. The simulation results show that QWL-RPL can improve the performance of a heterogeneous traffic network as compared with both OF0 and MRHOF, specifically in terms of the amount of overhead, packets reception ratio (PRR), average delay, and jitter. Final results indicate that on average, there is a 5%-30% improvement in PRR, 25%-45% reduction in overheads, 12%-30% reduction in average delay, and 20%-40% reduction in jitter.The Internet of Things (IoT) is a large system of interconnected heterogeneous devices to sense our physical environment and communicate the sensed information. Each sensor detects its vicinity and transmits the sensed information to the sink node via its neighboring nodes using multihop communication [1]. The practical applications of such a system include smart cities [2] [3], industrial and building automation, disaster management [4], smart grid, and smart healthcare [5]. A sensor discovers its neighbors, builds the topology, and routes the sensed data. An IoT system requires an efficient networking mechanism to facilitate such an interconnected heterogeneous flow of traffic. An efficient routing mechanism must consider these device characteristics and constrained resources. Furthermore, the IoT sensors usually face unfavorable environmental factors. Thus, designing of such routing protocols is a complicated task due to the resource limitations of these devices, such as limited energy, limited memory, and limited processing power [6]. For any pair of communicating nodes, a reasonable goal for such a protocol is to improve communication performance while maintaining energy consumption at a minimum level. However, achieving this goal requires careful consideration of the lossy nature of the network, fluctuating traffic patterns, varying link qualities, routing loops, and convergence time [7].Several rou...

show abstract

Section: Qwl-rpl Algorithm Implementation and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Routing protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks for heterogeneous traffic network

Musaddiq

Zikria

Zulqarnain

et al. 2020

J Wireless Com Network

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A key issue in Trickle is the introduction of listen-only period in the first half of each Trickle's interval (I) [119] [123]. The goal behind the listen period is to solve the so-called short-listen problem in asynchronous networks [53].…”

Section: ) Listen-only Periodmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In [119], the authors highlighted the problem of increased latency resulting from introducing the listen-only period in the Trickle algorithm. To address this problem, an Optimized-Trickle, (Opt-Trickle) is proposed.…”

Section: ) Listen Interval Oriented Enhancementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Summary and Insights: Although Trickle-F [118] has succeeded to some extent in solving the sub-optimality of constructed routes; the algorithm still suffers from slow convergence time due to the listen-only period. The study pertaining to Opt-Trickle [119] assumes a MAC protocol with 100% duty-cycle, which is neither reasonable nor realistic. Furthermore, Opt-Trickle still has a listen-only period in subsequent intervals, which would contribute to the increased latency especially in a lossy network where it is not guaranteed that a transmitted multicast message will reach all of its destinations at its first transmission in the first interval.…”

Section: ) Listen Interval Oriented Enhancementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Survey of Limitations and Enhancements of the IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks: A Focus on Core Operations

Ghaleb

Al‐Dubai

Ekonomou

et al. 2019

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Driven by the special requirements of the Lowpower and Lossy Networks (LLNs), the IPv6 Routing Protocol for LLNs (RPL) was standardized by the IETF some six years ago to tackle the routing issue in such networks. Since its introduction, however, numerous studies have pointed out that, in its current form, RPL suffers from issues that limit its efficiency and domain of applicability. Thus, several solutions have been proposed in the literature in an attempt to overcome these identified limitations. In this survey, we aim mainly to provide a comprehensive review of these research proposals assessing whether such proposals have succeeded in overcoming the standard reported limitations related to its core operations. Although some of RPL's weaknesses have been addressed successfully, the study found that the proposed solutions remain deficient in overcoming several others. Hence, the study investigates where such proposals still fall short, the challenges and pitfalls to avoid, thus would help researchers formulate a clear foundation for the development of further successful extensions in future allowing the protocol to be applied more widely.

show abstract

“…Since our focus on the DIO message generation and Trickle Timer analysis [2,4], we omit the discussion of other control messages for brevity. Alternatively, few works [3] have solely focused on optimizing the Trickle algorithm.…”

Section: Overview Of Rplmentioning

confidence: 99%

DIO messages and trickle timer analysis of RPL routing protocol for UAV-assisted data collection in IoT

Hazarika

Matam

Mukherjee

et al. 2020

Proceedings of the 2nd ACM MobiCom Workshop on Drone Assisted Wireless Communications for 5G and Beyond

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Routing protocol for low-power and lossy networks (RPL) is an widely-used IPv6 routing protocol for lossy wireless networks with the power constrained devices in Internet of Things (IoT). It is a proactive protocol that constructs a destination oriented directed acyclic graph (DODAG) rooted at the single destination called the root node that resides at unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV). Specifically, a DODAG is built with the help of different control messages like DODAG information object (DIO), DODAG advertisement object (DAO), and DODAG information solicitation (DIS). As the generation of these messages incur additional energy consumption, RPL uses the Trickle algorithm to dynamically adjust the transmission windows. In this paper, we analyze the effect of the two parameters, namely, DIO-INTERVAL-MINIMUM and DIO-INTERVAL-DOUBLING that have significant effect on the Trickle algorithm and the rate of message generation. Through experiments, we show that an optimal selection of these parameters saves a significant amount of energy with different parameter settings in UAV-assisted IoT networks.

show abstract

Optimizing the Trickle Algorithm

Cited by 35 publications

References 3 publications

Routing protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks for heterogeneous traffic network

Routing protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks for heterogeneous traffic network

A Survey of Limitations and Enhancements of the IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks: A Focus on Core Operations

DIO messages and trickle timer analysis of RPL routing protocol for UAV-assisted data collection in IoT

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About