Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
TSCH and 6TiSCH for Contiki: Challenges, Design and Evaluation
RISE - Research Institutes of Sweden, ICT, SICS. Inria Lille, France. (Computer Systems Laboratory)ORCID iD: 0000-0001-7592-1048
University of Bristol, UK. (Computer Systems Laboratory)
Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden.
University of Bristol, UK.
2017 (English)In: Proceedings of the Conference Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS), 2017, IEEE, 2017Conference paper, Published paper (Refereed)
Abstract [en]

Synchronized communication has recently emerged as a prime option for low-power critical applications. Solutions such as Glossy or Time Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) have demonstrated end-to-end reliability upwards of 99.99%. In this context, the IETF Working Group 6TiSCH is currently standardizing the mechanisms to use TSCH in low-power IPv6 scenarios. This paper identifies a number of challenges when it comes to implementing the 6TiSCH stack. It shows how these challenges can be addressed with practical solutions for locking, queuing, scheduling and other aspects. With this implementation as an enabler, we present an experimental validation and comparison with state-of-the-art MAC protocols. We conduct fine-grained energy profiling, showing the impact of link-layer security on packet transmission. We evaluate distributed time synchronization in a 340-node testbed, and demonstrate that tight synchronization (hundreds of microseconds) can be achieved at very low cost (0.3% duty cycle, 0.008% channel utilization). We finally compare TSCH against traditional MAC layers: low-power listening (LPL) and CSMA, in terms of reliability, latency and energy. We show that with proper scheduling, TSCH achieves by far the highest reliability, and outperforms LPL in both energy and latency. Synchronized communication has recently emerged as a prime option for low-power critical applications. Solutions such as Glossy or Time Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) have demonstrated end-to-end reliability upwards of 99.99%. In this context, the IETF Working Group 6TiSCH is currently standardizing the mechanisms to use TSCH in low-power IPv6 scenarios. This paper identifies a number of challenges when it comes to implementing the 6TiSCH stack. It shows how these challenges can be addressed with practical solutions for locking, queuing, scheduling and other aspects. With this implementation as an enabler, we present an experimental validation and comparison with state-of-the-art MAC protocols. We conduct fine-grained energy profiling, showing the impact of link-layer security on packet transmission. We evaluate distributed time synchronization in a 340-node testbed, and demonstrate that tight synchronization (hundreds of microseconds) can be achieved at very low cost (0.3% duty cycle, 0.008% channel utilization). We finally compare TSCH against traditional MAC layers: low-power listening (LPL) and CSMA, in terms of reliability, latency and energy. We showthat with proper scheduling, TSCH achieves by far the highest reliability, and outperforms LPL in both energy and latency

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
IEEE, 2017.
National Category
Computer Sciences
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:ri:diva-30110OAI: oai:DiVA.org:ri-30110DiVA, id: diva2:1128046
Conference
IEEE DCOSS 2017. Ottawa, Canada. June 5-7, 2017
Available from: 2017-07-21 Created: 2017-07-21 Last updated: 2018-07-06Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Authority records BETA

Duquennoy, Simon

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Duquennoy, Simon
By organisation
SICS
Computer Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

urn-nbn

Altmetric score

urn-nbn
Total: 92 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
v. 2.35.4