1
Introduction to IoT

Anshuman Kalla Pawani Prombage and Madhusanka Liyanage

Abstract

The successful existence of the Internet, its proven potential to cater to day‐to‐day needs of people from all walks of life and its indispensability to society at large, together have propelled the evolution of the current Internet to the next level termed as the Internet of Things (IoT). As a witness to the dawn of IoT revolution, what we are experiencing (and will continue in to do so in the near future at an exponential and astonishing rate) is the intelligent presence and communication of the physical objects or things around us with themselves (M2M) and/or with humans (M2H). Emergence of such a kind of pervasive inter‐networking ecosystem has enormous scope in terms of market growth and applications which have (to some extent) and will prove with greater force its efficacy to improve quality of life. Though it is bit early to precisely define the depth of coverage and the long‐term impact of IoT applications, nevertheless particularly in domains like healthcare, agriculture, city and home/office automation, industrial and energy management, etc. the immediate applications of IoT are easily conceivable. For realization and rapid development of such IoT applications, formal establishment of IoT architecture and standardization of related protocol suites are vital as they ensure co‐existence and co‐operation of cross‐vendor devices as well as applications. Nevertheless, as with any other hyped research area, IoT has also become victim of its own success and hitherto no one architecture is globally accepted with a common consensus.

In the midst of this, this chapter intends to introduce IoT in a pedagogical manner to the readers. More specifically, the chapter guides the reader through the evolution of IoT, discusses the pertinent taxonomy and proposed architectures, probes the various efforts for standardization of IoT and illustrates some of the popular applications of IoT. While dealing with promising IoT applications, the chapter presents a comprehensive view comprised of the constituent components and major stakeholders to fit‐in, characteristics and key factors to focus, enabling technologies to leverage and categorize each application to understand the various viewpoints.

1.1 Introduction

The evolution towards 5G is widely characterized by exponential growth in the number of computing devices embedded in everyday objects and interconnected over the Internet. Over 50 billion devices are expected on the cellular networks by the year 2020, compared to 12.5 billion devices in 2010 [41] and about 28 billion devices estimated in 2017 [6]. This massive interconnection of proliferating heterogeneous physical objects is technically termed as the Internet of Things (IoT). Such a kind of networking ecosystem enables communication‐capable resource‐constrained heterogeneous objects or devices to be connected over the Internet, in addition to the interconnections of computationally resourceful devices like computers, smartphones, PDA, etc. Thus, IoT renders the entire Internet space as the working area for such devices. In other words, the IoT paradigm begins to facilitate devices to acquire smartness by performing all sorts of operations (monitor, exchange, process, compute, make decisions indigenously or collaboratively) and accordingly take the required actions, based on the information being sensed anywhere across the globe. IoT system is poised to generate a significant surge in demand for data, computing resources, as well as networking infrastructures in order to accommodate these myriads of interconnected devices. Meeting these stringent demands necessitates appropriate improvisations to existing network infrastructures as well as computing technologies; one of such alterations is Multi‐Access Edge Computing (MEC) formerly know as Mobile Edge Computing [55]. Analogically, IoT can be viewed as the sensory and nervous system of the future Information and Communication Technology (ICT) whereas the brain's inherent capabilities to store, process and take decisions would be furnished by technologies like cloud computing, mobile edge computing, parallel computing as well as the sciences of big data analytics, artificial intelligence, machine learning, etc. Ensuring synergy between these technologies is the key to success.

1.1.1 Evolution of IoT

Initially, computer networking began with the aim of economic and efficient sharing (or accessing) of scarce and expensive (computing) resources. Soon, the development of TCP/IP protocol suites fueled the growth and lead to the advent of the global networking facility known as the Internet. Since then, the Internet has evolved tremendously and has achieved several decades of a successful existence. The years of maturity of the current Internet and the advancements in relevant underlying technologies have paved the way for the emergence of IoT. As shown in [63], the evolution of the Internet consists of five phases (Figure 1.1). Initial phase dealt with connecting together computers followed with the second phase that gave rise to the World Wide Web which connected a large number of computers as a web. Then, the mobile‐Internet came into picture which enabled mobile devices to be connected to the Internet and later peoples' identities also stepped in and joined the Internet by the means of social networks. Finally, the present phase nurtures the advent of IoT that envisions the connection of day‐to‐day physical objects to the Internet.

Illustration of the evolution of IoT, from computer-to-computer local network (Phase 1), to the Internet and WWW (Phase 2), to mobile Internet (Phase 3), to mobile Internet and social networks (Phase 4), to IoT (Phase 5).

Figure 1.1 Evolution of IoT.

Similar to that of the Internet, IoT also has its own journey; it is the culmination of convergence of different visions like Things oriented, Internet oriented, and Semantic oriented [31,32]. According to the definition in [45], IoT allows people and things to be connected anytime, anyplace, with anything and anyone, ideally using any path or network and any service. Continuing the momentum, one recent proposition named as Social Internet of Things (SIoT) aims to interconnect the IoT to human social networks [33]. SIoT explains how the objects are capable of establishing social relationships in an autonomous way with respect to their owners. Another prominent facet of IoT is Industrial Internet of Things (IIoT) which intends to transform the entire existing industrial manufacturing and maintenance system to a smart enterprise automation system provisioned with higher levels of intelligence and cognitive computing. It is realized by securely interconnecting industrial assets over the Internet and leveraging relevant technologies (for e.g. cloud computing) which leads to precise supervision in industrial environments and an increase in the return on investment.

1.2 IoT Architecture and Taxonomy

IoT has set the stage for interconnecting billions to trillions of objects through the Internet [31] and this number is expected to grow at an unprecedented rate. IoT devices are optimistically estimated to reach 75.44 billion by the end of 2025 and, moreover, 10 smart devices per capita is expected by 2025 as compared to two smart devices in 2015 [30]. Triggered by the requirement of seamless connectivity of such an enormously large number of heterogeneous objects, IoT entails a flexible layered architecture. In this direction, although an increasing number of architectures have been proposed for IoT with close collaboration between research and industry, hitherto, none has received common consensus and thus no reference model is yet firmly established  [29,85]. The architectural modeling of IoT is based on modifying the OSI (Open Systems Interconnection) standard with appropriate adjustments to the data link, network, and transport layers.

Block diagram of three-layer architecture: Application layer (top), Network layer (middle), and Perception layer (bottom).

Figure 1.2 Three layer architecture [87].

As discussed in much literature [33,53,87] IoT operates on three basic layers termed as Perception, Network, and Application as shown in Figure 1.2. The perception layer or the ‘Device Layer’ interacts with physical objects and components using the smart devices like RFID tags, sensors, actuators, etc. The key responsibilities include data acquisitions, processing the state information associated with smart objects and transmitting the raw data or processed information to the upper layers. The network layer enables optimal routing and data transmission through integration of heterogeneous and disparate networks using various connecting devices (hub, switch, gateways, routers), communication technologies (Bluetooth, WiFi, optical fibers, Long‐Term Evolution (LTE)) and protocols (IEEE 802.15.4, 6LoWPAN, Zigbee, Z‐Wave, CoAP, MQTT, XMPP, DDS). The application layer provides the essential services or operations to the users through the analyzed and processed perception data. This fulfills a combination of social and industrial demands in numerous domains including smart grid, smart transportation, smart cities, e‐health, data services, etc.

Block diagram of five-layer architecture. From top to bottom: Business layer, Application layer, Middleware layer, Network layer, and Perception layer.

Figure 1.3 Five layer architecture [50].

More recent literature highlights the use of the five‐layer model (Figure 1.3) to represent the architectural frameworks of IoT [31,50,58,81,87]. When viewed together, the 5‐layer architectures have many features in common, however, they introduce multiple intermediate layers between the perception and application layers. As per the 5‐layer architecture discussed in [50] the middleware layer supports the service management, receives information from the network layer, processes the information, performs ubiquitous computation and provides link to the database. The top most business layer manages the overall IoT system by determining the release of and charging of various IoT applications and by building the business models, graphs, flow charts, etc.

Block diagram of IoT-A architecture. Application and Device contain management, security, service organization, IoT process management, virtual entity, and IoT service. Arrows depict correlation between layers.

Figure 1.4 IoT‐A architecture [13].

In addition to the layered IoT model, in [85], the authors have surveyed the industry oriented reference IoT architectures. Some renowned architectures are identified as Reference Architecture Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI 4.0) [18], Industrial Internet Reference Architecture (IIRA) [24] and Internet of Things‐Architecture (IoT‐A) [13] (Figure 1.4). The IoT‐A concentrates on the generic aspects of informatics instead of the application facets of semantics whereas the IIRA focuses on the functionality of the industry domain like business, operations (prognostics, monitoring, optimization), information (analytics and data), and application (UIs, APIs, logic, and rules). RAMI 4.0 is domain specific and extends the view of the IIRA toward the life cycle and value streams of manufacturing applications. Furthermore, there have been a number of architectures designed for industrial IoT frameworks including SENSEI [82], ASPIRE [2], SmartSantander [73], iCore [3] and FIESTA‐IoT [37].

1.3 Standardization Efforts

Over the past couple of years, standardization of IoT has gained momentum since many organizations have stepped in and have boosted their contribution to develop a suite of protocols as well as open standards for IoT deployment that support inter‐operable communication [43,48,75]. Among them Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) has taken the lead in standardizing communication protocols for resource‐constrained devices such as Routing Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks (RPL), Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP), Low‐Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPAN), etc. [75]. Moreover, many other organizations and communities including the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), European Telecommunication Standards Institute (ETSI), 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), EPCglobal, Object Management Group (OMG), Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards (OASIS), and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) have made a noteworthy contribution to consolidate IoT standardization activities. ETSI introduced Machine‐to‐Machine standards relevant to IoT communication, whereas ITU coordinated activities on aspects of identification systems for M2M. Figure 1.5 presents an overall summary of the most prominent standards and protocols used for the realization of IoT.

Tables listing application protocols (top), network layer and middleware protocols (middle), and physical layer protocols (bottom).

Figure 1.5 Summary of standardization efforts available for IoT.

In the application layer, CoAP is the most widely used protocol which defines a constrained web protocol based on REpresentational State Transfer (REST) on top of well known HTTP functionalities [74]. Although CoAP is not a compressed version of HTTP, nevertheless, a subset of HTTP functions with small header (low overhead) and reduced complexity parsing in an optimized way to equip constrained devices with low‐memory footprint and less computational capability. CoAP supports UDP transport with application layer reliable unicast and best‐effort multicast, proxy caching capabilities and resource discovery. Message Queue Telemetry Transport (MQTT) provides embedded connectivity between applications and middleware on one side and networks and communications on the other side [15]. MQTT‐SN is specifically defined for sensor networks and is tailored to adapt to the peculiarities (and dynamics) of the wireless communication environment [77]. Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP) was designed originally for chatting and message exchange applications and later was reused in both IoT and SDN (Software Defined Networking) [72]. Advanced Message Queuing Protocol (AMQP) is an open standard application layer protocol for IoT and supports message‐oriented environments [10]. Some of the key features of AMQP include message orientation, queuing, routing (including point‐to‐point and publish‐and‐subscribe), reliability and security. OMG introduces another publish/subscribe protocol, named as Data Distribution Service (DDS), which suits IoT and M2M communication due to the excellent Quality‐of‐Service (QoS) levels and the broker less architecture that guarantees reliability [17].

Due to the high scalability of IoT, it requires a standard Domain Name System (DNS) type resource management mechanism to register and discover resources in a self‐configured, efficient, and dynamic way. Multicast DND (mDNS) and DNS Service Discovery (DNS‐SD) can browse the network for discovering resources and services offered by IoT devices [38,71]. IETF has designed RPL as a link‐independent distance‐vector routing protocol which is based on IPv6 for resource‐constrained nodes [83]. In RPL the nodes construct a Destination Oriented Directed Acyclic graph (DODAG) by exchanging distance vectors and root with a controller. The 6LowPAN protocol is an adaptation layer allowing to transport IPv6 packets over IEEE 802.15.4 networks with a maximum packet size of 127 bytes [62]. The standard provides compression of IPv6 and UDP/ICMP headers and fragmentation for reassembling of IPv6 packets. A new working croup called 6TiSCH is recently developed by IETF for standardizing IPv6 to pass through Time‐Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH) mode of IEEE 802.15.4e datalinks [40].

The IEEE 802.15.4 protocol specifies a sub‐layer for Medium Access Control (MAC) and physical (PHY). It defines a frame format and headers (including source and destination addresses) and also explains how nodes can communicate with each other [9]. This standard is used by IoT, M2M and WSN due its salient features which are the low‐power consumption, low data rate, low cost, interoperability, reliable communication and high message throughput. Bluetooth Low‐Energy (BLE) is another good candidate for IoT applications as it offers wider range, lower latency, and minimal amount of power over the classic Bluetooth [19]. RFID technology uses Electronic Product Code (EPC) unique identification numbers while EPCGlobal has become a universal standard [84]. Long‐Term Evolution Advanced (LTE‐A) is a scalable and lower‐cost protocol which fits well for M2M communication and IoT applications in cellular networks [14,47]. Z‐Wave is yet another low‐power protocol which is originally designed for automation networks in smart home applications and later was developed for small commercial domains [7].

In addition to those standards that define the operational framework of IoT, there exist many other protocols for security, interoperability and management purposes. Since the conventional security protocols on the Internet are not always compatible with the resource‐constrained IoT devices, the customized protocols have been defined (e.g., IPsec [49], Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) [70], Host Identity Protocol Diet‐exchange (HIP‐DEX) [61]). Furthermore, some other management protocols are available such as IEEE 1905.1 [12] for interoperability, Long Range Wide‐Area Network (LoRaWAN) [4], Wireless Smart Ubiquitous Network (Wi‐SUN) [1], Narrow Band IoT (NB‐IoT), Sigfox and Zigbee [11] for low‐power wide area networks (LPWANs). The unlicensed spectrum for LPWAN, LoRa radio, defines Physical and Data Link layers of LPWANs whereas LoRaWAN is analogous to Network and Transport layers of OSI communication stack. LoRaWAN is an open network protocol that manages communication between gateways and end‐devices [4].

According to the latest forecast report [22] from Rethink research, most of the growth of LPWAN technologies will be supported by NB‐IoT, LTE‐M and Wi‐SUN from 2017 to 2023 period. Moreover, they anticipate that LoRa and Sigfox respectively have slightly increasing and constant growth rates during the next seven years.

1.4 IoT Applications

Let's now divert our attention toward different types of application scenarios that can benefit from IoT revolution. A panorama of typical and potential applications including healthcare (e.g., patient monitoring and surgeries), smart energy, smart automotive (e.g. autonomous vehicles), industrial automation, etc. is shown in figure 1.6.

Radial diagram listing different IoT applications: smart home/city, smart energy, healthcare, IoT automobile, gaming (AR and VR), retail, tactile Internet, wearables, agriculture, and industrial Internet.

Figure 1.6 Different IoT Applications.

IoT applications have been categorized in different ways based on the scope of functionalities, number of devices required for deployment v/s reliability, level of scope of usage, etc.  [44], [20], [56]. Four‐category levels of IoT applications [44], in the increasing order of scope of offered functionalities, are Identity‐related services, Information Aggregation services, Collaborative‐Aware services and Ubiquitous services. Identity‐related services map every physical object into the network space (thereby making them addressable) as well as implement network resolution services. Some sort of such services is intrinsic to all IoT applications. Next, the services that readily collect appropriately aggregate data from heterogeneous objects in order to send it for processing come under the category of information aggregation services. Based on the received aggregated data, collaborative‐aware services take decisions and accordingly the responses/actions are coordinated to the point of actuation. Finally, the Ubiquitous services ensure the network‐wide pervasive presence and anytime availability of underlying collaborative‐aware services. IoT applications, when designed to rise up to the level of ubiquitous services, will yield maximum benefit, however, it requires smooth integration of technologies, protocols and standards.

Table 1.1 Categorization of Different IoT Applications.

IoT Application Categories as per [44] Categories as per [20] Categories as per [56]
Smart Home Collaborative aware Massive IoT Individual level
Smart City Collaborative aware Massive IoT Infrastructural level
Smart Energy Information aggregation Massive IoT Infrastructural level
IoT Automotive Information aggregation Critical IoT All‐inclusive level
Healthcare Information aggregation Massive IoT All‐inclusive level
Gaming, AR, VR Information aggregation Massive IoT Individual level
Retail Collaborative aware Massive IoT Organizational level
Wearable Information aggregation Massive IoT Individual level
Smart Agriculture Collaborative aware Massive IoT Organizational level
Industrial Internet Collaborative aware Critical IoT Organizational level

Among the wide range of IoT use cases, the market is heading towards two key categorized areas namely massive IoT and mission critical IoT [20]. In massive IoT, large numbers of low‐cost low‐powered devices typically emit a low volume of non‐delay sensitive data. The devices need to report to the cloud on a regular basis and therefore require seamless connectivity and good coverage. The application areas of massive IoT comprise smart home, smart agriculture, asset management and smart metering. By contrast, the critical IoT applications have very high demands of reliability, availability, and low latency.

Based on the scope of the usage and adaptation, IoT applications are categorized into four levels of applications [56]; infrastructural level, organizational level, individual level and all‐inclusive level. At infrastructural level, applications like smart city, smart energy, smart tourism etc. are placed where they have potential, in turn, to create the next level of the ecosystem. Industrial Internet, smart agriculture, retail etc. come under organizational level since such applications aim to automate the working of an organization. Quite obviously, the applications that fall under the category of individual level are smart home, gaming, wearable etc. However, there are few applications that have wider scope and can span through all the levels such as medical and healthcare, automotive, education etc.

Table 1.1 exhibits one‐way of categorizing different IoT applications whereas Table 1.2 reveals the characteristics of those IoT applications.

Table 1.2 Characteristics of Different IoT application [5,8,23,64,66].

IoT Application Data type Backhaul Connectivity Expected latency
Smart Home Stream / Historical data Realtime 1 ms ‐1000 s
Smart City Stream / Massive data Realtime images1ms
Smart Energy Stream / Massive data Realtime/ Intermittent 1ms ‐ 10 mins
IoT Automotive Stream / Massive data Realtime images1ms
Remote surgery Stream data Realtime images200 ms
Remote consultancy Stream data Realtime 1 ms‐100 s
Gaming, AR, VR Stream / Massive data Realtime images1ms
Retail  Stream / Historical data Realtime/ Intermittent images1 ms
Wearable Stream data Intermittent Several Hours
Smart Agriculture Historical data Intermittent Several hours
Industrial Internet Stream / Massive data Realtime images1 ms
Tactile Internet Stream Realtime images1 ms
Concept map of stakeholders of smart home environment. Smart home, control apps, data analytics and alert generation, and utility providers are all connected to the Cloud. Smart home and control apps are also linked to each other.

Figure 1.7 Stakeholders of Smart Home Environment.

1.4.1 Smart Home

The concept of smart home is not new and has been around long before even the birth of IoT. The idea of smart home is to monitor, manage, optimize, access remotely, in short, fully automate the home environment comprising household devices and home appliances while minimizing human effort. IoT vision intrinsically promises to furnish the much needed underpinning ecosystem that supports the easy accomplishment of smart home application.

IoT‐based smart home makes use of both local (but limited) storage and processing units (example gateway or hub) as well as cloud infrastructure [78,88]. With augmentation of edge computing performance is expected to be improved significantly as the operations are not computational intensive. Apparently, the achieved gain would be in terms of latency, load balancing, traffic reduction and progressive‐resource utilization.

Smart home is sometimes seen as an extension of smart grid concept [78]. From that perspective, the primary intent of smart home is to optimize the energy consumption taking into account various inputs like usage pattern and real‐time presence of residents, the external environment (e.g. weather condition), time of the day, balance units of pre‐paid electricity account etc.

Prominent stakeholders of smart home are shown in the figure 1.7. In addition, the major components constituting the smart home application are smart security & surveillance systems, smart HVAC (Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning), self‐adjustable and smart customization of the environment based on the user's profile, smart energy management and smart object traceability via IoT powered GIS. The key factors i.e. challenges pertinent to the smart home are high privacy and security, high reliability, high interoperability, strong adaptation to multipath error prone wireless environment etc. Various contending technologies and standards for IoT driven smart home are ZigBee, 6LoWPAN, low power WiFi, BLE, RFID, Insteon, cloud computing etc.

Undoubtedly, full‐flexed realization of IoT enabled smart home application has enormous potential to enhance the experience of personal living.

Illustration of an urban landscape with icons labeled as smart industry; safety, security, and surveillance; smart society; retail; smart mobility; smart healthcare; smart infrastructure; and utility management.

Figure 1.8 Use of IoT in Smart Cities.

1.4.2 Smart City

Many countries have already embarked on their plan of smart city projects, including Germany, USA, Belgium, Brazil, Italy, Saudi Arabia, Spain, Serbia, UK, Finland, Sweden, China and India [27,30]. This trend indicates the rise of IoT from its infancy to blossoming state. As depicted in figure 1.8, some of the major components of an IoT driven smart city are smart hygiene, smart mobility & traffic management, smart governance, smart development of infrastructure, smart commutation, smart surveillance and smart utility management.

The factors that comparatively deserve more attention while developing an IoT‐based smart city are high scalability, low latency, high reliability, high availability and high security. Depending on the specific nature of the service offered via smart city projects a subset of technologies can be exploited from figure 1.5. In general, for small range connectivity RFID, ZigBee, Bluetooth, Wi‐Fi, etc. technologies are used, however, to provide extensive long range backhaul connectivity to massive IoT devices spread across a city, technologies like GSM, WCDMA, 3G, LTE and 5G (in near future) could be employed.

Concept diagram listing the components of a smart energy system: wind plants, thermal plants, nuclear plants, power distribution, power storage, industries and factories, electric vehicles, home and smart meter, solar plants, and hydro power plants.

Figure 1.9 Components of Smart Energy System.

1.4.3 Smart Energy

In a nutshell, the tasks involved in the energy sector are power generation at the source, transmission of power over high‐voltage lines from source up to substations (generally located in the vicinity of the point of high demand), distribution to the end consumers, billing at predefined time cycle, and 24x7 monitoring & maintenance comprising of fault detection and rectification. In this sphere, the early usage of IoT is quite conspicuous since multipurpose smart meters and smart thermostats are already deployed [68]. Continuing the momentum, IoT has an extensive role to play both from a utility provider's perspective as well as from the consumer's perspective.

Major components of IoT‐driven smart energy, as depicted in the figure 1.9, are smart energy generation including renewable energies (can be thought as an instance of IIoT application), smart maintenance involving prediction‐based early diagnosis of failure and subsequently proactive rectification, smart access to real‐time usage to optimize consumption and for billing purposes, smart capacity building based on the conclusions drawn from data analytics applied over huge data collected from the users. Moreover the prime factors to keep in mind in context of IoT powered smart energy application are high (self) sustainability, high resiliency, high safety and high level of optimization. Underlying promising technologies for IoT that have potential to drive smart energy application are LoRa, SigFox, Power‐Line Communication (PLC), IEEE 802.15.4, Z‐Wave, etc [69].

Concept diagram listing the role of IoT in smart healthcare: wearable, patients, nurses, doctors, lab technicians, smart hospitals, medical robots, telemedicine, and emergency response.

Figure 1.10 Role of IoT in Smart Healthcare.

1.4.4 Healthcare

IoT driven healthcare applications are envisioned to roll‐out in a massive way and it is envisioned to capture the biggest chunk of the future IoT market by 2025 [29]. IoT has built‐in capabilities to support well all sorts of medical healthcare; preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic and rehabilitation healthcare [36]. Interestingly, on one side, the healthcare sector demands IoT paradigm to bestow living beings with solutions that can monitor various physiological parameters, detect symptoms and thereby (early) diagnose, suggest preventive measures, and progressively adapt treatment based on AI and ML approaches. On the other side, medical IoT can guide pharmaceutical companies to develop and design new medicines based on data analytics of IoT generated big data of recent patients and take further appropriate measures when required.

Figure 1.10 gives a glimpse into the role of IoT in the healthcare domain. Various entities which can directly or indirectly benefit from healthcare application of IoT are patients, doctors, supporting staff (i.e. nurse and technicians), hospitals, medical insurance companies and pharmaceutical industries. Medical IoT devices such as smart watch, bands, shoes, clothes, etc. can sense and communicate in real‐time the vital signs of an admitted patient remotely to a doctor who, if required, can instruct the attending nurse to take action on an urgent basis. One can imagine numerous major components of IoT healthcare applications, some of them are smart remote health monitoring, smart asset management for hospitals, smart medical inventory optimization based on real‐time healthcare data analytics, smart patient‐doctor rapport, smart augmented treatment and surgeries, etc.

It is worth noting, the factors that are of paramount importance among others while developing IoT solutions for healthcare application are ultra‐high safety, ultra‐high precision, high trustworthiness, high privacy and low energy consumption [52]. Various technologies that have the potential to play significant role in this area are BLE, WBAN (IEEE 802.15.6), LR‐WPAN (IEEE 802.15.4) and NB‐IoT [65].

1.4.5 IoT Automotive

By 2040, it is optimistically estimated that 90% of the overall sales of vehicles will be either highly automated (level ‐ 4) vehicles or fully automated (level ‐ 5) vehicles [59]. Many companies, for example Tesla, Google, BMW, Ford, Uber etc. are working in this direction [54]. IoT in conjunction with cloud computing and Mobile Edge Computing (MEC) [51] would play a significant role in the realization of connected and autonomous vehicles (aka self‐driving or driverless or robotic vehicles) in the coming future. Vehicles gradually reaching higher levels of autonomy can have by and large following as their major components; smart self‐optimization and maintenance to be carried out by the vehicle itself or remotely by the owner, smart security and safety systems, smart customization of ambience based user's profile, smart navigation, etc.

Today, there are approximately 60 to 100 sensors embedded in a single vehicle and soon the number will rise to 200 [21]. This trend falls in line with the fundamental prerequisite of IoT‐enabled vehicles, which is the presence of all sorts of sensors in abundance. Thus, the adaptation of IoT in the automobile industry is well anticipated. Various underlying technologies for vehicular communications are Bluetooth, ZigBee, Dedicated Short Range Communication (DSRC), WiFi and 4G cellular technology [51]. However, based on [26] the vital factors that need to be tackled are seamless real‐time last mile connectivity when the vehicle is on the move, high bandwidth, low power, high privacy and minimization of roaming issue which in‐turn minimizes the associated impacts like an increase in latency and fluctuations in the price of home v/s foreign network providers.

Moreover, drones or UAV (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) acting as sensor devices open‐up avenues for a large number of IoT applications in many domains such as agriculture, mining operations, public safety and industrial inspection services [67].

Concept diagram listing selected AR and VR transformational use cases: military, retail, real estates, video entertainments, live events, engineering, healthcare, video games, and education.

Figure 1.11 Selected AR and VR transformational use cases.

1.4.6 Gaming, AR and VR

Yet another exciting application of IoT is in the realm of gaming, AR and VR, since IoT phenomenon has innate potential to enhance and uplift the perceived experience of users. Basically, Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR) and Mixed Reality (MR) provide an experience of the computer‐generated illusory world in simulated environments, however, they vary in the degree of immersive presence and interactivity. AR adds digital elements to a live view often by using the camera on a smartphone and VR implies a complete immersion experience that shuts out the physical world. An MR experience combines elements of both AR and VR, where real‐world and digital objects interact.

Interestingly, the immersive nature of available virtual reality devices backed‐up by IoT ecosystem has set the foundation for the next level of gaming experience that can be supplemented by Brain‐Control Interface (BCI) control signals [39]. Over the years, the purpose behind gaming has transformed and is no more confined merely to entertainment. As a result, gamification is yet another fascinating area which has been explored in various sectors like education & training, health management, market research, etc. [60]. A multitude of other VR, AR and MR centric propitious use cases of IoT are shown in figure 1.11. Real‐time immersive viewing of remote live events will enrich the experience of television several fold. Moreover, a conglomeration of IoT, VR, MR & AR, in conjunction with cloud computing, mobile edge computing, artificial intelligence and data analytics will set a new path for the way we perceive and work in this world [76].

The prominent factors to consider for IoT‐energized Gaming, AR and VR applications are real‐time connectivity, high bandwidth, low power consumption, and most importantly ultra‐low latency and interactive response time that essentially bridges the gap between virtuality and reality in order to minimize cyber‐sickness.

1.4.7 Retail

Among others, retail is yet another captivating area that aspires to harness the capabilities of IoT. Entire new sets of real‐time services can be introduced that at one end enhances the customer experience to the next level and on the other hand alleviates the way the retail sector (i.e. business‐to‐consumers (B2C)) is managed and maintained. Major components of retail applications of IoT are smart supply chain and logistics, smart finance management and intelligent prediction, smart real‐time customer assistance while purchasing, smart complainy management system, smart post‐purchase relations and feedback system.

The distinctive factors to bear in mind while developing IoT‐based retail solutions are aesthetic presence, customer friendliness, context awareness and high QoE of customers [34].

1.4.8 Wearable

By now it is difficult to deny the fact that Wearable IoT (WIoT) devices and gadgets are closely interwoven in our present life style. Ranging from trendy devices like fitness tracker and smart watches, to fancy smart attire and essential medical devices, wearable IoT devices have hit the market in a big way. They are projected to capture the market drastically and will stand just next to smartphones in consumer electronics [79]. Major components of WIoT are smart tracking, smart infotainment, smart clothing, smart assistance, smart medical monitoring and personal security alarms, etc.

Some of the key factors to take into account while designing and developing WIoT (devices, protocols, applications etc.) are ultra‐high safety, ultra‐low power consumption, high level of comfort to the human body, highly user‐friendly, low latency, high context awareness, high privacy and high bandwidth.

1.4.9 Smart Agriculture

Agriculture forms the very base of human civilization and also serves as means to provide a livelihood for farmers. As per [25] the percentage of employment in agriculture to the total employment has dramatically reduced from 43.24 % in 1991 to 25.95 % in 2018. This is alarming as the outcome of agriculture is lifesaving and meets a primary need of humans. In this context, IoT is anticipated to play a remarkable role to alleviate the overall situation.

Various tasks involved in IoT‐driven smart agriculture are monitoring and acquisition of ambient data which is of a large variety and of huge volume, followed by its aggregation and exchange over the network, making short‐term and long‐term decisions based on data analytics and artificial intelligence and, at times, remotely actuating the decisions with help of field robots. It can also help in the prediction of yield to ensure the economic value to be gained, as well as early detection of diseases spread in crops, to enable timely preventive measures. Various technologies used are Bluetooth, RFID, Zigbee, GPS as well as other technologies gaining popularity in this application which are SigFox, LoRa, NB‐IoT, edge computing, and cloud computing [80].

Some of the major components of IoT‐based smart agriculture are smart plowing, smart seedbed preparation and planting, smart irrigation, smart fertilization, smart harvesting, smart stock maintenance, smart livestock management which deals with smart animal tracking, smart health monitoring, smart feed and fodder management, etc. An IoT solution for smart agriculture has different demands and so takes into account the following key factors; low‐cost (both CAPEX and OPEX), low‐power, highly reusable, cross‐operational, highly efficient (big) data management, resource efficient, scalable and progressively extendable solutions.

1.4.10 Industrial Internet

An industrial application of IoT is referred as IIoT and at times is also referred to as the Industrial Internet [35,46]. IIoT securely interconnects industrial assets (taken in a broader sense), over the Internet with the use of wide varieties of technologies shown in figure 1.5 and also by leveraging relevant technologies and concepts like cloud computing, edge or fog computing, big data analytics, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML). Thus, IIoT has huge potential to facilitate precise supervision in an industrial environment, optimize value of productivity at low cost of operations and maintenance and finally, leads to an increase in the return on investment for stakeholders by offering ameliorated QoS [24].

Major components of IIoT are smart manufacturing, smart customer relationships, smart supply chain, smart budgeting, smart asset (all inclusive) and resource management. Some of the key factors to emphasizes are low latency, high precision, massive data management and analytics and perpetual connectivity.

Chevron diagram listing the revolutionary leap of Tactile Internet and their features, from mobile Internet, to IoT, to Tactile Internet.

Figure 1.12 The revolutionary leap of the Tactile Internet.

1.4.11 Tactile Internet

The IoT networks started from the mobile Internet which interconnects billions of smart phones, portable devices and laptops. Mobile Internet plays a vital role in many domains such as health, energy, transport, education, logistics and many consumer industries. Currently, we are making use of the present generation of mobile networks which interconnect billions of IoT devices. Technologies such as NB‐IoT have developed to provide reliable and efficient connectivity for these IoT devices. Tactile Internet is considered as the next generation of IoT networks [16,28]. It is an advance version of the IoT networks with ultra‐reliable, ultra‐responsive and ultra‐security network connectivity with extremely low latency. Thus, tactile Internet can deliver real‐time control and physical tactile experiences remotely. These features will open up new domains of tactile Internet services such as remote surgery, robotics, autonomous vehicles and many more. Figure 1.12 shows the evolution of tactile Internet.

The very first telesurgical operation was carried out as early as 2001 [57]. However, telesurgery is still not in the mainstream due to the technical limitations, especially in underlying communication networks. With the characteristics of tactile Internet, telesurgery types of procedure are realistic [86]. In industrial environments, Tactile Internet can be used for remote mining in high‐risk areas, efficient manufacturing of highly customized products and remote inspection, maintenance and repair [42].

1.4.12 Conclusion

The chapter presents a lucid and compact summary of the IoT world and several pertinent facets of IoT, especially, the plethora of exciting IoT applications that open doors to a new world of services and users' experience. The IoT vision embraces the existence of all sorts of resource‐constrained communication‐capable targeted or generic purpose heterogeneous smart objects. Thus, in addition to the search for new technologies, IoT has apparently revived numerous forgotten technologies and has also effectuated the resurgence of research activities in these respective domains.

For IoT to transform into a profitable venture and find its fully flexed pragmatic realization, numerous factors have been discussed specific to each diversified application. In essence, IoT's global acceptance primarily depends on a few key factors like reliability with the bounded response time, economic and incremental approach which takes into account existing infrastructure thereby incentivizing the stakeholders, seamless integration over heterogeneity in terms of objects, technologies, protocols, platforms, applications, etc., scalability in terms of enormous objects distributed over a fleet of locations to be connected over the Internet, availability supporting infrastructure to gather, exchange and process big data, and finally ability to draw intelligent conclusions by performing data mining, data analytics, machine learning which in‐turn helps with decision making.

Acknowledgement

This work is supported by European Union RESPONSE 5G (Grant No: 789658) and Academy of Finland 6Genesis Flagship (grant no. 318927) projects.

References

  1. 1 WiSun Alliance (2017). Comparing IoT Networks at a Glance: How Wi‐SUN compares with LoRaWAN and NB‐IoT. WiSUN technical White paper. www.wi-sun.org/wp-content/uploads/Wi-SUN-Comparing-IoT-Networks.pdf (accessed 16 July 2019).
  2. 2 EU Fp7 ASPIRE project. https://aspire-fp7.eu/ (accessed 16 July 2019).
  3. 3 EU FP7 iCore project. http://www.coreproject.eu (accessed 16 July 2019).
  4. 4 LoRAWAN specifications, LoRa Alliance Technology. https://lora-alliance.org/resource-hub/lorawanr-specification-v11 (accessed 16 July 2019).
  5. 5 Chadwick, S. (2018) Putting Sensors to Work in the Factory Environment: Data to Information to Wisdom. https://itpeernetwork.intel.com/putting-sensors-to-work-in-factory-environment/#gs.q2drfl (accessed 16 July 2019).
  6. 6 Sage Business Researchermore than 28 billion devices connect via internet of things. http://businessresearcher.sagepub.com/sbr-1863-102197-2772812/20170306/more-than-28-billion-devices-connect-via-internet-of-things. (accessed 17 July 2019).
  7. 7 Smart Home products with Z‐Ware. Z‐wave Technology. https://www.z-wave.com/ (accessed 16 July 2019).
  8. 8 GSMA. (2016) Unlocking Commercial Opportunities From 4G Evolution to 5G. GSMA Network Technical Report. https://www.gsma.com/futurenetworks/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/704_GSMA_unlocking_comm_opp_report_v5.pdf (accessed 16 July 2019).
  9. 9 IEEE. (2012). IEEE standard for local and metropolitan area networks‐part 15.4: Low‐rate wireless personal area networks (lr‐wpans) amendment 1: Mac sublayer. IEEE Std 02.15.4e‐2012 (Amendment to IEEE Std 802.15.4‐2011), 1–225.
  10. 10 OASIS. (2012). OASIS Advanced Message Queuing Protocol (AMQP) Version 1.0. OASIS Standard. http://docs.oasis-open.org/amqp/core/v1.0/os/amqp-core-overview-v1.0-os.html (accessed 16 July 2019).
  11. 11 Zigbee Alliance. (2012). ZigBee Specification. 1–622. ZigBee Alliance. http://www.zigbee.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/docs-05-3474-20-0csg-zigbee-specification.pdf (accessed 16 July 2019).
  12. 12 IEEE. (2013). 1905.1‐2013 –IEEE Standard for a Convergent Digital Home Network for Heterogeneous Technologies. IEEE Standard.
  13. 13 Bauer, M., Boussard M., Bui, N. et al. (2013). Deliverable D1.5 Final architectural reference model for the IoT v3.0. IoT‐A Consortium. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272814818_Internet_of_Things_-_Architecture_IoT-A_Deliverable_D15_-_Final_architectural_reference:model_for_the_IoT_v30 (accessed 16 July 2019).
  14. 14 Wannstrom, J. (2013). LTE‐Advanced Specifications. 3GPP Org. https://www.3gpp.org/technologies/keywords-acronyms/97-lte-advanced (accessed 16 July 2019).
  15. 15 OASIS. (2014). MQTT v3.1.1. OASIS Standard. https://mqtt.org/ (accessed 16 July 2019).
  16. 16 ITU‐T. (2014). The tactile internet. ITU‐T Technology Watch Report. https://www.itu.int/dms_pub/itu-t/oth/23/01/T23010000230001PDFE.pdf (accessed 16 July 2019).
  17. 17 OMG. (2015). Data Distribution Service (DDS) Specification Version 1.4. OMG Standard. https://www.omg.org/spec/DDS/About-DDS/ (accessed 16 July 2019).
  18. 18 Platform Industrie. (2015). Reference Architecture Model Industrie 4.0 (RAMI 4.0). Platform Industrie. https://www.plattform-i40.de/PI40/Redaktion/EN/Downloads/Publikation/rami40-an-introduction.pdf?__blob (accessed 16 July 2019).
  19. 19 Bluetooth SIG Working Group. (2019). Bluetooth Core Specification Version 5.1. Bluetooth SIG. https://www.bluetooth.com/specifications/bluetooth-core-specification/ (accessed 16 July 2019).
  20. 20 Ericsson Working Group. (2016). Cellular Networks for Massive IoT. Ericsson White Paper. https://www.ericsson.com/en/white-papers/cellular-networks-for-massive-iot–enabling-low-power-wide-area-applications (accessed 16 July 2019).
  21. 21 Automotive Sensors and Electronics Expo, 2017. Detroit, USA (14–15 June 2017).
  22. 22 Rethink Technology Research (2017). LPWAN Revenue Forecast, 2017 to 2023. Rethink Technology Research. https://rethinkresearch.biz/report/lpwan-market-forecast-2017-2023/ (accessed 16 July 2019).
  23. 23 iGillot Research. (2017). The Business Case for MEC in Retail: A TCO Analysis and its Implications in the 5G Era. Intel technical White Paper, IGR. https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/communications/multi-access-edge-computing-brief.html (accessed 16 July 2019).
  24. 24 Shin, S.‐W., Crawford, M., and Mellor, S. (eds) (2017). The Industrial Internet of Things Volume G1: Reference Architecture. 1–58. Industrial Internet Consortium (IIC). https://www.iiconsortium.org/IIC_PUB_G1_V1.80_2017-01-31.pdf (accessed 16 July 2019).
  25. 25 Employment in agriculture (% of total employment) (modeled ILO estimate). The World Bank, (2018). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.AGR.EMPL.ZS (accessed 16 July 2019).
  26. 26 IoT in the Automotive Industry. Tata Communications (2018). https://www.tatacommunications.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/IOT-IN-THE-AUTOMOTIVE-INDUSTRY.pdf (accessed 16 July 2019).
  27. 27 Adapa, S. (2018). Indian smart cities and cleaner production initiatives–integrated framework and recommendations. Journal of Cleaner Production 172: 3351–3366.
  28. 28 Aijaz, A., Dohler, M., Aghvami, A.H., et al. (2017). Realizing the tactile internet: Haptic communications over next generation 5g cellular networks. IEEE Wireless Communications 24 (2): 82–89.
  29. 29 Al‐Fuqaha, A., Guizani, A.M., Mohammadi, M. et al. (2015). Internet of things: A survey on enabling technologies, protocols, and applications. IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials 17 (4): 2347–2376.
  30. 30 Alavi, A.H., Jiao, P., Buttlar, W.G. and Lajnef, N. (2018). Internet of things‐enabled smart cities: State‐of‐the‐art and future trends. Measurement 129: 589–606.
  31. 31 Atzori, L., Iera, A. and Morabito, G. (2010). The internet of things: A survey. Computer Networks 54 (15): 2787–2805.
  32. 32 Atzori, L., Iera, A. and Morabito, G. (2017). Understanding the internet of things: definition, potentials, and societal role of a fast‐evolving paradigm. Ad Hoc Networks 56: 122–140.
  33. 33 Atzori, L., Iera, A., Morabito, G. and Nitti, N. (2012). The social internet of things (SIoT): When social networks meet the Internet of Things: Concept, architecture and network characterization. Computer Networks 56 (16): 3594–3608.
  34. 34 Balaji, M. and Roy, S.K. (2017). Value co‐creation with internet of things technology in the retail industry. Journal of Marketing Management 33 (1–2): 7–31.
  35. 35 Boyes, H., Hallaq, B., Cunningham, J. and Watson, T. (2018). The industrial internet of things (IIoT): An analysis framework. Computers in Industry 101: 1–12.
  36. 36 Brucher, L. and Moujahid, S. (2017). The Internet‐of‐Things A revolutionary digital tool for the healthcare industry. Deloitte. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/lu/Documents/life-sciences-health-care/lu_digital-tool-healthcare-industry_062017.pdf (accessed 16 July 2019).
  37. 37 Carrez, F., Elsaleh, T., Gomez, D. et al. (2017). A reference architecture for federating IoT infrastructures supporting semantic interoperability. Networks and Communications (EuCNC), Oulu, Finland (12–15 June 2017). IEEE.
  38. 38 Cheshire, S. and Krochmal, M. (2013). DNS‐Based Service Discovery. IETF RFC 6763. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6763 (accessed 16 July 2019).
  39. 39 Coogan, C.G. and He, B. (2018). Brain‐computer interface control in a virtual reality environment and applications for the internet of things. IEEE Access 6: 10840–10849.
  40. 40 Dujovne, D., Watteyne, T., Vilajosana, X. and Thubert, P. (2014). 6tisch: deterministic IP‐enabled industrial Internet (of Things). IEEE Communications Magazine 52 (12): 36–41.
  41. 41 Evans, D. (2011). The internet of things: How the next evolution of the internet is changing everything. CISCO white paper 1 (2011): 1–11.
  42. 42 Fettweis, G.P. (2014). The tactile internet: Applications and challenges. IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine 9 (1): 64–70.
  43. 43 Gazis, V. (2017). A survey of standards for machine‐to‐machine and the internet of things. IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials 19 (1): 482–511.
  44. 44 Gigli, M. and Koo, S.G. (2011). Internet of things: Services and applications categorization. Advanced Internet of Things 1 (2): 27–31.
  45. 45 Guillemin, P. and Friess, P. (2009). The Industrial Internet of Things Volume G1: Reference Architecture. The Cluster of European Research Projects, Technical Report.
  46. 46 Gurtov, A., Liyanage, M. and Korzun, D. (2016). Secure communication and data processing challenges in the industrial internet. Baltic Journal of Modern Computing 4 (4): 1058–1073.
  47. 47 Hasan, M., Hossain, E. and Niyato D. (2013). Random access for machine‐to‐machine communication in LTE‐advanced networks: issues and approaches. IEEE Communications Magazine 51 (6): 86–93.
  48. 48 Kae, V.P., Fukushima Y. and Harai, H. (2016). Internet of things standardization ITU and prospective networking technologies. IEEE Communications Magazine 54 (9): 43–49.
  49. 49 Kent, S. and Seo, K. (2005). Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol. IETF RFC 4301.
  50. 50 Khan, R., Khan, S.U., Zaheer, R. and Khan, S. (2012). Future internet: The internet of things architecture, possible applications and key challenges. 2012 10th International Conference on Frontiers of Information Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan (17–19 December 2012). IEEE.
  51. 51 Kong, L., Khan, M.K., Wu, F. et al. (2017). Millimeter‐wave wireless communications for IoT‐cloud supported autonomous vehicles: Overview, design, and challenges. IEEE Communications Magazine 55 (1): 62–68.
  52. 52 Kumar, T., Braeken, A., Liyanage, M. and Ylianttila, M. (2017). Identity privacy preserving biometric based authentication scheme for naked healthcare environment. 2017 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), Paris, France (21–25 May 2017). IEEE.
  53. 53 Lin, J., Yu, W., Zhang, N. et al. (2017). A survey on internet of things: Architecture, enabling technologies, security and privacy, and applications. IEEE Internet of Things Journal (99): 1–1.
  54. 54 Litman, T. (2017). Autonomous vehicle implementation predictions. Victoria Transport Policy Institute Victoria, Canada.
  55. 55 Liyanage, M., Ahmad, I., Abro, A.B. et al. (2018). A Comprehensive Guide to 5G Security. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
  56. 56 Lu, Y., Papagiannidis, S. and Alamanos, E. (2018). Internet of things: A systematic review of the business literature from the user and organisational perspectives. Technological Forecasting and Social Change 136: 285–297.
  57. 57 Marescaux, J., Leroy, J., Gagner, M. et al. (2001). Transatlantic robot‐assisted telesurgery. Nature 413 (6854): 379.
  58. 58 Miorandi, D., Sicari S., Pellegrini, F.D. and Chlamtac, I. (2012). Internet of things: Vision, applications and research challenges. Ad Hoc Networks 10 (7): 1497–1516.
  59. 59 Munster, G. and Bohlig, A. (2017). Auto Outlook 2040: The Rise of Fully Autonomous Vehicles. Loupventures. https://loupventures.com/auto-outlook-2040-the-rise-of-fully-autonomous-vehicles/ (accessed 16 July 2019).
  60. 60 Nacke, L.E. and Deterding, C.S. (2017). The maturing of gamification research. Computers in Human Behaviour 450–454.
  61. 61 Nie, P., Vähä‐Herttua, J., Aura, T. and Gurtov, A. (2011). Performance analysis of HIP diet exchange for WSN security establishment. 51–56. ACM.
  62. 62 Thubert, P. (2011). Compression Format for IPv6 Datagrams over IEEE 802.15.4‐Based Networks. IETF RFC 6282.
  63. 63 Perera, C., Zaslavsky, A., Christen, P. and Georgakopoulos, G. (2014). Context aware computing for the Internet of Things: A survey. IEEE Communications Surveys Tutorials 16 (1): 414–454.
  64. 64 Perez, M., Xu, S., Chauhan, S. et al. (2016). Impact of Delay on Telesurgical Performance: Study on the Robotic Simulator dV‐Trainer. International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery 11 (4): 581–587.
  65. 65 Porambage, P., Manzoor, A., Liyanage, M., et al. (2019). Managing mobile relays for secure e2e connectivity of low‐power IoT devices. IEEE Consumer Communications & Networking Conference, 2019, Las Vegas, USA (11–14 January 2019). IEEE.
  66. 66 Porambage, P., Okwuibe, J., Liyanage, M. et al. (2018). Survey on multi‐access edge computing for internet of things realization. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 20 (4): 2961–2991.
  67. 67 Rajakaruna, A., Manzoor, A., Porambage, P. et al. (2018). Lightweight dew computing paradigm to manage heterogeneous wireless sensor networks with UAVs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.04283. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1811.04283.pdf (accessed 16 July 2019).
  68. 68 Ramamurthy, A. and Jain, P. (2017). The internet of things in the power sector opportunities in Asia and the Pacific. Asian Development Bank https://www.adb.org/publications/internet-of-things-power-sector-opportunities (accessed 25 June 2019).
  69. 69 Reka, S.S. and Dragicevic, T. (2018). Future effectual role of energy delivery: A comprehensive review of internet of things and smart grid. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 91: 90–108.
  70. 70 Rescorla, E. and Modadugu, N. (2012). Datagram Transport Layer Security Version 1.2. IETF RFC 6347.
  71. 71 Cheshire, S. and Krochmal, M. (2013). Multicast DNS. IETF RFC 6762.
  72. 72 Saint‐Andre, P. (2011). Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Core. IETF RFC 6120.
  73. 73 Sanchez, L., Muñoz, L., Galache, J.A. et al. (2014). Smartsantander: Iot experimentation over a smart city testbed. Computer Networks 61: 217–238.
  74. 74 Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and Bormann, C. (2014). The Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP). IETF RFC 7552.
  75. 75 Sheng Z., Yang, S., Yu, Y. et al. (2013). A survey on the ietf protocol suite for the internet of things: standards, challenges, and opportunities. IEEE Wireless Communications 20 (6): 91–98.
  76. 76 Shoikova, E., Nikolov, R. and Kovatcheva, E. (2018). Smart digital education enhanced by ar and iot data. INTED2018 Proceedings, 12th International Technology, Education and Development Conference, Valencia, Spain (5–7 March 2018). INTED.
  77. 77 Stanford‐Clark, A. and Truong, H.L. (2013). MQTT For Sensor Networks (MQTT‐SN) Protocol Specification Version 1.2. OASIS Standard.
  78. 78 Stojkoska, B.L.R. and Trivodaliev, K.V. (2017). A review of internet of things for smart home: Challenges and solutions. Journal of Cleaner Production 140: 1454–1464.
  79. 79 Sun, H., Zhang, Z., Hu, R.Q. and Qian, Y. (2018). Wearable communications in 5g: challenges and enabling technologies. IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine 13 (3): 100–109.
  80. 80 Talavera, J.M., Tobon, L.E., Gomez, J.A. et al. (2017). Review of IoT applications in agro‐industrial and environmental fields. Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 142: 283–297.
  81. 81 Tan, L. and Wang, N. (2010). Future internet: The internet of things. 2010 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), Chengdu, China (20–22 August 2010). ICACTE.
  82. 82 Tsiatsis, V., Gluhak, A., Bauge, T. et al. (2010). The SENSEI Real World Internet Architecture. Towards the Future Internet 247–256.
  83. 83 Winter, T., Thubert, P., Brandt, A. et.al. (2012). RPL: IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low‐Power and Lossy Networks. IETF RFC 6550.
  84. 84 Uckelmann, D., Harrison, M. and Michahelles, F. (2011). An Architectural Approach Towards the Future Internet of Things, 1–24. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
  85. 85 Weyrich, M. and Ebert, C. (2016). Reference architectures for the internet of things. IEEE Software 33 (1): 112–116.
  86. 86 Wong, E., Dias, M.P.I. and Ruan, L. (2016). Tactile internet capable passive optical lan for healthcare. OptoElectronics and Communications Conference (OECC) held jointly with 2016 International Conference on Photonics in Switching (PS), Niigata, Japan (3–7 July 2016). IEEE.
  87. 87 Wu, M., Lu, T.‐J., Ling, F.‐Y. et al. (2010). Research on the architecture of internet of things. In 2010 3rd International Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), Chengdu, China (20–22 August 2010). IEEE.
  88. 88 Zaidan, A.A., Zaidan, B.B., Qahtan, M. et al. (2018). A survey on communication components for iot‐based technologies in smart homes. Telecommunication Systems 69 (1): 1–25.
..................Content has been hidden....................

You can't read the all page of ebook, please click here login for view all page.
Reset
18.226.169.94