Internet of Things integration with WSN, Selected Challanges

1. Wireless Sensor Networks and the
Internet of Things: Selected Challenges

2. Definition:
 “A world wide network of interconnected
objects uniquely addressable based on
standard communication protocols”.
 Objects are : Computer, Sensors, RFID tags,
Mobile Phones etc.
 Dynamically join the network to collaborate
and cooperate to efficiently achieve the task.

3.  Three Main Categories
 Monitoring Space
 Deployed in Glaciers, Forest to gather environmental
parameters like Temperature, Moisture or light to
analyze environmental phenomena.
 Monitoring Objects
 Structural, monitoring of bridges and buildings.
 Indicates potential breakages
 Monitoring Interaction between Space and Objects
 Monitoring environmental threats like flood, volcanos.

4. - We extends the classification
- Which includes Monitoring of Human Beings.
- Used specially in Medical/Health area.
- Gathering acceleration and Physiological Info.
Heart beat rate.

5.  Three approaches to integrate WSN to Internet
 Single Gateway
 Hybrid
 Access point network.
 Multiple sensors can join the internet in one hop.

6.  Single Gateway approach presents a single
point of failure.
 Gateway failing will break down the internet
connection.

7.  Hybrid and Access point network present
multiple gateways and ensure the robustness
of the network.

8.  The second approach:
 Deployed in Monitoring Space and Monitoring
interactions between objects and space.
 Can be envisaged in WSNs organized in Mesh
topology.

9.  Offering internet access in one hop.
 Adopted by WSNs application require low
latency and therefore direct connection.
 Suitable for Monitoring Objects and Human
Beings.
 Presenting mainly star topology,
 Organization having central gateway instead of
central base station.

10.  Both Second and Third approaches lacks
flexibility in current form.
 Support static network Configuration
 New device joining the network requires time-
consuming gateway reprogramming.

11.  To fulfill the flexibility expectation:
 Adopting IP to the field paradigm.
 The sensor are expected to be intelligent network
components, not limited to sensing task.
 Transferring the intelligence to sensor nodes,
 The gateways will forwarding and protocol translation.
 Gateway reprogramming no more required,
 And dynamic network configuration could be attained.

12.  By introducing the “IP to the field” paradigm
 Security :
 Quality of service (QoS)
 Configuration

13.  In absence of Internet,
 The sensor nodes ensures the data
confidentially, integrity and authentication
depending on the application sensitivity.
 By opening WSNs to internet:
 Location proximity will no more be required
and the attackers will attack from anywhere.

14.  WSNs to address threats like malware by the
internet connection and evolving with the
attacker creativity.
 Mostly protected by a central and unique
powerful gateway ensuring efficient protection.

15.  Reuse of such mechanisms made impossible by
 Scarce energy, limited memory and
computational resources of the sensor nodes.
 Many services use cryptography with large key
lengths such as RSA-1024, which sensors don’t
support.
 Innovative mechanisms must be developed to
protect WSNs from attacks.

16.  With gateways acting as Forwarding and
Protocol translation
 Expected to contribute to the quality of service
management by optimizing the resource utilization
of all heterogeneous devices.
 Heterogeneity opens new perspective in terms of
work load distribution.
 Resource difference may exploited by sharing the
current workload among the nodes.

17.  The existing approaches ensuring QoS in
internet are not applicable in WSNs, as sudden
change in link can lead to reconfiguration of
the WSN topology.
 To overcome this issue, novel approaches to be
find towards ensuring delay and loss
guarantees.

18.  Sensor nodes can also be required to control the
WSNs configuration,
 Covering different tasks,
 Address administration to ensure scalable network
constructions
 Self-healing capabilities by detecting and eliminating
faulty nodes or managing their own configuration.

19.  Self configuration of participating nodes is not
a common feature in internet.
 The user install applications to recover the
system from crashes.
 In contrast, the unattended operation of
autonomous sensor nodes requires novel
means of network configuration and
management.