4.8 Article

Experimental Characterization of Mobile IoT Application Latency

期刊

IEEE INTERNET OF THINGS JOURNAL
卷 4, 期 4, 页码 1082-1094

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JIOT.2017.2689682

关键词

Cellular networks; e-health; Internet of Things (IoT); machine-to-machine (M2M) communications; mobile gateways (GWs); smartphones; system performance; wireless networks

资金

  1. NanoSTIMA [NORTE01-0145-FEDER-000016]
  2. PT Inovacao - Altice Labs
  3. Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE) through Portugal
  4. European Regional Development Fund
  5. FCT/MEC through national funds
  6. FEDER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Internet of Things (IoT) emerges as a myriad of devices and services that interact to build complex distributed applications. Interoperability and standardization are imperative for the realization of this vision. Machine-to-machine (M2M) communications standards can be the middleware that glues together the IoT. However, standards are highly complex and require a large amount of interpretation, deployments are currently scarce, and performance evaluations simplistic or speculative. In this paper, we focus on the experimental evaluation of latency in IoT service composition with mobile gateways (GWs). We measure latency between system components and quantify application protocol overheads to assess the capabilities and limitations of a standard M2M middleware. We designed and implemented a mobile e- health use case on top of ETSI M2M and openEHR standards. We ran a pilot remote monitoring ten people for three weeks, collecting nearly 480 h of data. Our results show that while the latency added by a broker lies around 25 ms, the cellular network often exceeds 1 s, becoming a problem for interactive applications. Moreover, we observe that latencies between a smartphone GW and cloud hosted services vary largely depending on the user mobility, and on the promotion delay of the used wireless network.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据