RPL cooperation experiments using FIT IoT-LAB...

RPL cooperation experimentsusing FIT IoT-LAB testbed

Brandon [email protected]

Julien [email protected]

Inria Lille - Nord Europe

ICube - UMR 7357

Journees non-thematiques du GDR Reseaux et Systemes Distribues

January 23, 2020

Outline

1 Scientific contextInternet of ThingsRPL: routing in the IoTInherent issues in RPL

2 Contribution

3 Experimentation

4 Conclusion

Internet of Things (IoT)

Set of constrained objects interconnected with the Internetvia wireless communications

ConstraintsComputation powerMemory storageBattery → limited energy

New usages, new standardsClassic IP protocols not efficient with IoT devicesSpecialized standards from the IEEE and the IETF

Brandon Foubert Sharing is caring 1 / 17

RPL: routing in the IoT [WTB12]

Proactive intra-domaindistance-vector routing protocolDestination Oriented DirectedAcyclic Graph (DODAG)Metrics: Hop count, ExpectedTransmission Count (ETX)...Traffic patterns: multi-point topoint, point to multi-point,point to point

RPL root

Network link

DODAG link

Figure 1: Physical and logical topology

[WTB12] T. Winter et al. RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power and Lossy Networks. RFC 6550. Mar. 2012


RPL inherent issues

Border router

X

Network link

Internet

Collect station

DODAG link

Figure 2: Border router failure

Root

DODAG link

Figure 3: Funneling effect [WEC05]

Solution = border router redundancyOrphan nodes redirect traffic to another border routerMultiple exit points → traffic shared between multiple paths

[WEC05] Chieh-Yih Wan et al. “Siphon: Overload Traffic Management Using Multi-radio Virtual Sinks in Sensor Networks”. In:Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems. ACM, 2005


Related work

BR2BR1

DODAG link

Internet

Network linkInternet link

Central coordinator

Figure 4: Central coordination [NMM16]

Rank 4

RootRank 0

DODAG link

Rank 2

Figure 5: Local load balancing [KKP17]

[NMM16] Quang-Duy Nguyen et al. “RPL Border Router Redundancy in the Internet of Things”. In: Ad-hoc, Mobile, andWireless Networks. Ed. by Nathalie Mitton, Valeria Loscri, and Alexandre Mouradian. Springer International Publishing, 2016.isbn: 978-3-319-40509-4[KKP17] H. S. Kim et al. “Load Balancing Under Heavy Traffic in RPL Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks”.In: IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 16.4 (Apr. 2017), pp. 964–979. issn: 1536-1233


Related work

BR2BR1

DODAG link

Internet


Central coordinator

X

Figure 4: Single point of failure [NMM16]

Rank 4

RootRank 0

DODAG link

Rank 2


[NMM16] Quang-Duy Nguyen et al. “RPL Border Router Redundancy in the Internet of Things”. In: Ad-hoc, Mobile, andWireless Networks. Ed. by Nathalie Mitton, Valeria Loscri, and Alexandre Mouradian. Springer International Publishing, 2016.isbn: 978-3-319-40509-4

[KKP17] H. S. Kim et al. “Load Balancing Under Heavy Traffic in RPL Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks”.In: IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 16.4 (Apr. 2017), pp. 964–979. issn: 1536-1233


Related work

BR2BR1

DODAG link

Internet


Central coordinator

X


Rank 3

RootRank 0

DODAG link

Rank 3


[NMM16] Quang-Duy Nguyen et al. “RPL Border Router Redundancy in the Internet of Things”. In: Ad-hoc, Mobile, andWireless Networks. Ed. by Nathalie Mitton, Valeria Loscri, and Alexandre Mouradian. Springer International Publishing, 2016.isbn: 978-3-319-40509-4[KKP17] H. S. Kim et al. “Load Balancing Under Heavy Traffic in RPL Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks”.In: IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 16.4 (Apr. 2017), pp. 964–979. issn: 1536-1233


Related work

BR2BR1

DODAG link

Internet


Central coordinator

X


Rank 1

RootRank 0

DODAG link

Rank 6

Figure 5: Network instability [KKP17]

[NMM16] Quang-Duy Nguyen et al. “RPL Border Router Redundancy in the Internet of Things”. In: Ad-hoc, Mobile, andWireless Networks. Ed. by Nathalie Mitton, Valeria Loscri, and Alexandre Mouradian. Springer International Publishing, 2016.isbn: 978-3-319-40509-4

[KKP17] H. S. Kim et al. “Load Balancing Under Heavy Traffic in RPL Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks”.In: IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing 16.4 (Apr. 2017), pp. 964–979. issn: 1536-1233


Outline

1 Scientific context

2 ContributionConsidered scenarioMultiple border routersLoad balancingMultiple IPv6 prefixes

3 Experimentation

4 Conclusion

Considered scenario

Smart cities: smart street lights,smart health, smart parking, etc.→ colocated networksDifferent Internet serviceprovidersDifferent IPv6 prefixesSame IoT stack

Smart City

Figure 6: Smart cities (from [IEE18])

[IEE18] IEEE smart cities. url: https://beyondstandards.ieee.org/smart-cities/smart-smart-cities/ (visited on08/20/2018)


https://beyondstandards.ieee.org/smart-cities/smart-smart-cities/

Multiple border routers

Redundancy → failure resilience & load sharing between exit points⇒ RPL + distributed virtual DODAG root⇒ Initialization using discovering (e.g. [KLR16])

BR2BR1

BR1 DODAGBR2 DODAG

Internet

Network link

Virtual link

Internet link

Control message

Figure 7: Border router discovering and inter-connexion

[KLR16] M. M. Khan et al. “A multi-sink coordination framework for low power and lossy networks”. In: 2016 InternationalConference on Industrial Informatics and Computer Systems (CIICS). Mar. 2016, pp. 1–5




Overhearing

BR2BR1

BR1 DODAGBR2 DODAG

Internet

Network link

Virtual link

Internet link

Control message






BR2BR1

BR1 DODAGBR2 DODAG

Internet

Network link

Virtual link

Internet link

Control message

VR




Load balancing

Border router redundancy → static (i.e. non-adaptative) load balancing⇒ RPL + explicit redirection:

Multiple RPL instances → border router differentiationColocated networks → nodes set ”redirectable” flagCongested border router → DODAG Redirection Solicitation (DRS)

6

Network link

Internet

54

BR2

BR1

3

12

Control messagesBR1 instance BR2 instance

Figure 8: Redirection of node 4 from BR1 to BR2


Load balancing



6

Network link

Internet

54

BR2

BR1

3

12


BR1→5 nodesBR2→1 node



Load balancing



DR

S

DIS

6

Network link

Internet

54

BR2

BR1

3

12




Load balancing



DIO

6

Network link

Internet

54

BR2

BR1

3

12




Multiple IPv6 prefixes

Considered scenario → multiple distinct IPv6 prefixes⇒ RPL + IPv6 Network Prefix Translation (NPT) [WB11]⇒ Prefixes sharing → backup routes → multi-homing

Prefix A

Network link

BR1 Internet

DODAG link Packet path

Figure 9: Address translation upon border router packet forwarding

[WB11] M. Wasserman and F. Baker. IPv6-to-IPv6 Network Prefix Translation. RFC 6296. June 2011




Prefix B

Network link

BR1 Internet







Network link

BR1 Internet


Prefix B




Outline


2 Contribution

3 ExperimentationExperimental setupTopologiesBandwidth repartitionEnd-to-end packet error rateNumber of one-hop transmissionsEnergy consumption

4 Conclusion

FIT/IoT-LAB

Figure 10: Strasbourg testbed


Hardware

Figure 11: M3 Open Node


Experimental setup

Contiki OS 3.x → Contiki RPLFIT/IoT-LAB testbed, M3 nodes

ParametersIEEE 802.15.4 CSMA/CAno radio duty cycle mecanism1 UDP packet per secondsub-DODAG size threshold as congestion trigger

Scenario2 border routers & 8 traffic generating nodesBorder router 53 wakes up 60s after border router 18100 experiments of 1h each


Topologies

(a) RPL topology (b) RPL-NPT-LB topology

Figure 12: Cumulative final DODAGs from all experiments(the thicker a link is, the more frequently it appears)


Bandwidth repartition

0 400 800 1200 1600 2400 2800 3200

Time (s)

0

80

160

240

320

400

480

2000

(1 second intervals)

RPL-NPT-LB BR18 RPL-NPT-LB BR53RPL BR18Bandwidth(Bytes)

○≈ 460B/s

○≈ 480B/s

t1 t2 t3

(cumulative)

Figure 13: Better division of the traffic load between border routers


End-to-end packet error rate

26 30 34 38 48 54 56 58Node n°

12

10

8

6

4

2

0PE

R di

ffere

nce

(%)

Figure 14: End-to-end losses difference between RPL-NPT-LB and RPL (lower is better)


Number of one-hop transmissions

26 30 34 38 48 54 56 58Node n°

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000Nu

mbe

r of t

rans

miss

ions

Figure 15: Number of transmissions (red is RPL — green is RPL-NPT-LB)


Energy consumption

26 30 34 38 48 54 56 58Node n°

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.0Co

nsum

ptio

n di

ffere

nce

(J)

Figure 16: Energy consumption difference between RPL-NPT-LB and RPL (lower is better)


Outline


2 Contribution

3 Experimentation

4 Conclusion

Conclusion

IoT and RPL → single point of failure (border router)Colocated networks → cooperation for redundancy

Future workExperiment with larger and random network layoutsDifferent congested mode triggersPrecise assessment before redirection (e.g. link quality)


RPL cooperation experiments using FIT IoT-LAB testbedContact: [email protected]

Thank you for your attention!Any questions?

[FM19] Brandon Foubert and Julien Montavont. “Sharing is caring: a cooperation scheme for RPL network resilience andefficiency”. In: ISCC 2019 - 24th Symposium on Computers and Communications. June 2019

Control messages

DIO DAO DIS DRS0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180Number of control messages

RPLRPL_NTP_LB

Figure 17: Transmission number of control messages

Experimental parameters

MAC layer IEEE 802.15.4 CSMA/CAMAC acknowledgments Enabled

MAC Tx queue size 1 packetRDC mechanism No RDC (NULLRDC)

Traffic type UDP packetsTraffic rate 1 packet per secondTx power 3 dBm

Rx power threshold -60 dBmMotes used 10 M3 open nodeRPL mode Non-storing

RPL OF MRHOF ETXCongested mode trigger Sub-DODAG size threshold

Repartition of transmission state

26 30 34 38 48 54 56 58Node n°

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000Nu

mbe

r of t

rans

miss

ions

Tx ok No ack Ack tx Ack collision Queue drop

Figure 18: Repartition of transmission state (left RPL — right RPL-NPT-LB)

RPL cooperation experiments using FIT IoT-LAB...

Documents

Transcript of RPL cooperation experiments using FIT IoT-LAB...