19th International Symposium INFOTEH-JAHORINA, 18-20 March 2020

An Overview of Wireless Technologies for IoT

Network
Miljan Sikimić Momčilo Amović
Department of Computers and Information Technology Oracle Department
Faculty of Electrical Engineering Lanaco company
East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina
[email protected] [email protected]

Vladimir Vujović Bojan Suknović

Department of Computers and Information Technology Department of Computers and Information Technology
Faculty of Electrical Engineering Faculty of Electrical Engineering
East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
[email protected] [email protected]

Dragan Manjak
Department of Computers and Information Technology
Faculty of Electrical Engineering
East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina
[email protected]

Abstract — The Internet of Things (IoT) is a concept of the modern, However, the development of IoT has not only defined new
interconnected world. Over 50 billion devices, globally-connected, theoretical concepts, but it has also initiated a revolution in the
make up the largest network that is stepping towards the fourth information and communication (ICT) industry. Global demand
industrial revolution, and which will significantly change the has led to the expansion of microcontroller and microprocessor
system of values and business systems. In the world of devices of various purposes and processing power, and today the
heterogeneous communication technologies, choosing the optimal most relevant on the market are Low-cost Single Board
one is a challenge for system architects, which is not an easy task Computer (SBC), which possesses significant processing power
often. The paper presents a comparative analysis of widespread and memory power [6, 10, 11]. A key element of the IoT concept
communication technologies in the domain of IoT, and the is the ability to communicate and connect smart, autonomous
conclusions presented based on the performed analysis, provide a and heterogeneous devices. Such connected devices form
better insight into the choice of the optimal solution depending on networks of different topologies and connect to a global
the problem domain and therefore better quality of solutions network, the Internet. By relying on the integrated
based on the concept of IoT. communication components of SBC, which are most commonly
Wi-Fi and Bluetooth 4.0, it is possible to implement most of the
Keywords - Internet of Things; communication; wireless; radio requirements set out in the above application fields. However,
communication; comparative analysis; due to different implementation requirements, it may sometimes
not be possible to apply these communication technologies due
I. INTRODUCTION to factors such as consumption, reach, network topology,
Looking at the accelerated development of the Internet of security, and other critical elements that may affect the
Things (IoT) concept in recent years, it's easy to conclude that implementation and reliability of the IoT network.
the predictions mentioned in literature have been correct. Today, The solution to this problem may be introducing new
more than 50 billion devices are connected to the Internet [3, 4, communication technologies that can significantly improve the
6], which makes a whole new virtual world, and the factors that affect the communication of IoT networks.
growth/expansion trend continues. IoT has found application in However, choosing the right technology for a particular class of
a wide range of areas such as communication and connectivity, problems can cause an additional challenge in the design process
home and living environment, healthcare and medical, itself.
agricultural, transportation and logistics, infrastructure, smart
cities, industries, education, governance, etc. [1-7, 9, 21]. In The paper presents a comparative analysis of widespread
addition to these areas, the IoT concept is the backbone of the communication technologies in the domain of IoT. Key factors
fourth industrial revolution, which points to a whole new level influencing their implementation have been identified and
in the organization and control of the entire value creation chain selected, and analysis for the selected networks has been done
[6].

978-1-7281-4775-8/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE

for each of them, with their advantages and disadvantages being III. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS CRITERIA
identified.
The scope of application or usage of an IoT network has a
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The second significant impact on the choice of the optimal solution in terms
section presents related work in the field of IoT radio of adequate hardware and software infrastructure. The wide
communication field while the third section provides a selected scope of IoT usage, where each of them specifically dictates
set of criteria and factors for comparative analysis. Fourth hardware, software and communications needs, defines the
section describe wireless communication technologies, while factors that must be captured by the analysis process.
comparative analysis of selected communication technologies is If the IoT communication network is viewed in isolation as one
shown in the fifth section. The sixth section gives the of the building blocks, it is necessary to define the criteria, as
conclusion. well as their role, and the importance they have depending on
the scope of the IoT network, which can significantly affect the
II. RELATED WORK design process as well as the optimal choice.
As stated in the introductory chapter, the application of the Analyzing publications in the field of IoT application, a set
IoT system has found its place in a wide range of everyday of features has been identified that have a significant impact on
applications as well as specialized applications (industrial the process of designing and implementing an IoT network [7,
applications). The key elements that IoT imposes in terms of 13, 17, 23]:
long-range, low data rate, low energy consumption, and cost
efficiency [17] define the frameworks for designers of these • Reach
systems, but also the problems that need to be addressed. The • Bandwidth
heterogeneous communication technologies available today • Coverage
cover the entire spectrum of the field, however, due to their • Power consumption
diversity, their application is not adequate in all applications. For • Reliability
this reason, it is necessary to periodically analyze available • Latency
technologies and answer the question of what are the differences • Cost-effectiveness
between various wireless technologies and what technology The above criteria are key elements whose role varies
fulfills the needs of a particular user and application. depending on the specific application domain of the IoT
In the available publications that analyze communication network. The subsequent change of the type of communication
technologies, the authors defined different criteria based on network in the later stages of project implementation represents
which they made comparative analysis. However, it is difficult an additional time and financial cost, which significantly
to choose reference criteria because they depend on the domain increases the total cost of development. Therefore, the selection
of the problem being solved. In [26], the range of network of an adequate communication network must be well planned
activity was taken as the criterion for analysis, while in [13-20, through consideration of all the characteristics as well as
22-28], several characteristics of the applied wireless requirements dictated by the problem domain. In this process,
communication technology were observed, which were testing and validation is an indispensable and essential part of
observed during the analysis (frequency band, range, data designing IoT networks. Once the POC (Proof of concept)
transfer rate, modulation type, etc.). experiment is established, it is necessary to scale the potential
solution (scale-up process) to the projected number of devices,
Based on the specifics of IoT applications, we will look at to check all set parameters, and thus to perform the valorization
the classification of wireless communications networks used in of the selected network.
IoT through the areas of activity: short-range, long-range and
cellular. In papers [14, 20, 22, 23, 27], short-range It is important to note that from a unique solution, there is no
communication technologies such as RF, Bluetooth, Infrared, optimal choice of implementing an IoT network, so the cost-
ZigBee, NFC, and Wi-Fi are analyzed in detail, as well as benefit analysis is often made, which answers the question
technologies located on the margins of short-range and long- which networks most suit the user requirements of the IoT
range ranges, which largely depend on the environments in project.
which they are applied [24]. Cellular network analysis has been A. Range
presented in papers [20, 23, 24, 27, 28]. The general conclusion
drawn from these publications is that the widely used short- The application of IoT in smart city areas on the one hand,
range radio technologies (e.g., RF, Bluetooth, Infrared, ZigBee, as well as smart meter readings on the other, leads to conflicting
NFC, and short-range Wi-Fi) are not adapted for scenarios that requirements regarding the reach of a communications network
require long-range transmission. Solutions based on cellular and can extend from a few kilometers to just a few centimeters
communications (e.g., 2G, 3G, 4G, and 5G) can provide greater of distance. The example above explains the importance of range
coverage, but they consume excessive device energy, so the as an important criterion for choosing the right IoT network
solution needs to be found in new approaches and technologies. implementation. Depending on the distance of IoT nodes,
communication networks are divided into three basic categories:
Publications [13-19] have analyzed the leading technologies short-range networks, medium-range networks, and long-range
available and today represent the popular low - rate long-range networks [7].
radio communication technology in the field of IoT. Low Power
Wide Area Networks (LPWAN) analysis, as well as SigFox and B. Bandwidth
NB-IoT technology, are presented. Depending on the application of the IoT network, nodes may
send information periodically, e.g. in smart home systems, fire
detection sensor connects to the network and sends information
in case smoke/fire is detected. In contrast, if IoT nodes are used
in security applications such as security cameras, then there must Based on the above, it can be concluded that low power
be constant communication and the transmission of significant consumption in wireless IoT networks is a feature that is
amounts of data. Increasing bandwidth affects the reach and possible and feasible, but to a considerable extent limited [12].
power consumption, which entails other factors such as the cost
and cost-effectiveness of the entire system, making bandwidth F. Coverage
an important criterion for making the right decision when Wireless coverage is defined as the extent of the area to
choosing an IoT network implementation. which the wireless signals are transmitted, and generally can be
divided into five categories that differ in distance and speed of
C. Reliability access [8, 14]:
If the designed IoT system is used in medical systems to
monitor the patient's vital parameters, one of the most important • Wireless Body Area Network (WBAN) - used to
features is that the correct information is successfully monitor and collect vital parameters of a person,
transmitted to the destination as soon as possible. On the other • Wireless Personal Area Network (WPAN) - Provide
hand, in the case of the application of the IoT system in short-range communication for devices.
agriculture, the transmission or omission of transmission of • Wireless Local Area Network (WLAN) - provide
information on e.g. soil humidity at a certain interval, will not communication in a restricted area.
cause significant damage. Increasing reliability also has a • Wireless Metropolitan Area Network (WMAN) -
significant impact on increasing bandwidth and cost, which puts networks that provide communications at the city level.
reliability at the center of an important criterion for choosing an • Wireless Wide Area Network (WWAN) - connect large
IoT network implementation. geographical areas (countries or continents).
The challenge of picking the right communication
D. Latency
technology for the implementation of the IoT network depends
Network latency is defined as the time it takes for a request largely on the application of the designed IoT system. For
to be forwarded from the transmitting device to the receiving instance, the application of IoT in designing smart cities, or
device, including the time it takes the destination device to smart agriculture, coverage differs significantly from the
process it. In cases of application of IoT nodes in industry, application of IoT for medical purposes. In these cases, coverage
sending control information and signals, e.g. for the can range from a few centimeters, up to several tens of
management of the power grid, it can be concluded that in this kilometers.
case, it is very important that the information is transmitted to
the destination so, if a problem occurs, then the network can be It is important to note that greater network coverage does not
switched off as soon as possible. In contrast, the application of necessarily mean better data flow or speed of exchange.
the IoT network in agriculture, e.g. soil temperature Coverage is a necessary but not sufficient condition for data
measurements, the transmission time can be considered transmission and sharing to be possible [13].
negligible. Reduced latency has the effect of reducing the G. Cost-effectiveness
lifespan of autonomous IoT nodes, and is, therefore, an essential
factor in the correct choice of IoT network implementation. Cost-effectiveness is an aggregate criterion that is closely
related to the business model and is proportionally dictated by
E. Energy efficiency the budget, needs, and capabilities that the designed IoT system
Energy efficiency, that is, the energy consumption of IoT must have. Cost-effectiveness is calculated according to all other
nodes can certainly be seen as one of the key parameters when criteria, e.g. systems where large amounts of data are transmitted
designing an IoT network. The concept of IoT itself over the network, depending on the topology of the network
encompasses autonomous sensor nodes that have an increased nodes (if the nodes are at a shorter distance from the system's
lifespan, which is a considerable problem in the development data concentrator and close to the power source), Wi-Fi could be
process. By introducing state-of-the-art technological solutions the best choice. If it is a WAN system, then one network
into the process of developing hardware components of IoT, the technology that works on the principle of mobile data will be an
problem of autonomous power sources has been significantly adequate choice. The selection of the appropriate network
resolved. However, while the capacity and quality of should primarily comply with the basic requirements of the
autonomous power sources are increased, energy efficiency system to select the network that will have optimal cost-
remains a key element in the design process. Some of the reasons effectiveness for a particular IoT system [13].
that lead to increased consumption are the constant activity of
IoT nodes and their sensor units, as well as the large exchange IV. WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES
of data within the sensor network. Minimizing the activity time Wireless communication technologies are defined as the
of IoT nodes, eliminating full-duplex or half-duplex ability to transmit data or information wirelessly from one
communication models, and reducing data transmission time as device to another, and as such are an integral part of any IoT
well as their amount (encryption application and hexadecimal system. Depending on the domain of application of the IoT
format transfer) have made significant savings in terms of system, information is transmitted from one device to another at
energy efficiency. Also, when designing IoT nodes, it is different distances that can range from a few centimeters to
necessary to pay attention to the consumption of sensor elements several hundred kilometers through clearly defined transmission
that can significantly cut the life of an IoT node. The channels.
configuration of nodes in the network, as well as the atmospheric
conditions of the environment in which the IoT nodes are Due to the heterogeneity of the market, as well as the
located, can also affect energy consumption. technologies available today, there is no unique technology for
wireless transmission, and most often they can be divided by the
length of the electromagnetic waves and the frequencies at
which they operate. The four basic types of signals used for E. LoRaWAN
wireless transmission are Radio Frequency Transmission, LoRaWAN is a type of wireless network and one of the most
Infrared Transmission, Microwave Transmission, and famous representatives of LPWAN (Low Power Wide Area
Lightwave Transmission. Network) technologies. LoRaWAN is often found in the
The work below describes the main features of current literature under the acronyms LoRa, LoRa Alliance, etc. LoRa
wireless communications technologies used in IoT systems (stands for Long Range) is a physical layer that is Semtech's
selected based on popularity in the available literature and intellectual property that enables long-range communication.
publications. The Special Interest Group (SIG) has formed a LoRa alliance
consisting of industrial and commercial partners, which together
A. Bluetooth develop an open spectrum network called LoRaWAN, which is
Bluetooth is a type of wireless connection developed by the a MAC layer on the OSI reference model. It is The LoRa
Bluetooth Special Interest Group (SIG). The basic purpose is Alliance claims that LoRaWAN is a communication protocol
communication between devices at short distances and is most and network system structure while LoRa is "just" a physical
commonly used to connect a computer peripheral. It operates in layer for long-distance data exchange [5]. LoRaWAN is
the 2.4 GHz ISM (industrial, scientific and medical) band, and compatible with European regulatory standards as well as with
more recently it is the de-facto standard in the mobile industry. North American regulatory standards. As the LoRa Alliance
Bluetooth Low Energy (sometimes referred to as Bluetooth announced in 2015, data transmission in Europe is on the 864-
Smart) is a variant that was launched in 2011 as part of the 870 MHz ISM (Industrial, Scientific, Medical) band, while in
Bluetooth 4.0 specification, and the advantage over earlier North America, LoRaWAN transmits data on the 903-914.9
versions is that it uses less power, has less setup time, and MHz band as well as the 923.3-927.5 MHz band [5]. Today
supports an unlimited star type topology by the number of nodes. many commercial and industrial solutions work on the
BLE is specific for devices with low bandwidth, as well as for LoRaWAN principle. To communicate with backend systems, it
devices powered by autonomous power sources [29, 30]. uses a network and application server, which until November
2019 was called the LoRa Network and Lora Application Server.
B. Near-field Communication (NFC) Due to the name LoRa protected by SemTech, the server was
NFC is a wireless communications technology that was renamed ChirStack [15].
developed by Sony and Philips. It works on the principle of
magnetic coupling between the devices and enables two-way F. NB-IoT
data transfer when the two devices are placed side by side (up to NB-IoT (Narrow-band IoT) is a network that belongs to the
a maximum distance of 10 cm). NFC is RFID based and operates LTE-IoT type of wireless network. It is based on the operation
at up to 13.56 MHz. Includes a tag that contains a small amount of 4G mobile networks. The main features of this network are
of data, and can be read-only or read-write when the device high coverage, lower power consumption than other LTE-based
rewrites the data. The most common application is in mobile networks, and even cost, as NB-IoT is more affordable than
devices for contactless payment, that is, storage and access to all eMTC. The coverage is large and ranges from 450 MHz to 3.5
types of personal data [31-34]. GHz. According to Qualcomm, NB-IoT can work on both 2g
and 3G networks. The total throughput of the NB-IoT network
C. Wi-Fi was reduced to 200 kHz. The NB-IoT network operates on the
Represents the most commonly used communication principle of half-duplex communication and uses TDD (Time
standard, assigned as 802.11 by the Institute of Electrical and Division Duplex) and FDD (Frequency Division Duplex). This
Electronics Engineers (IEEE). The technology is promoted by divides the available band (into multiple frequencies or time
the non-profit Wi-Fi Alliance, which certifies products with Wi- bands) and the transmitter or receiver uses this allocated band to
Fi interoperability. It works in the 2.4 to 5 GHz range, and an receive or send data. The first commercial NB-IoT products
access point and a wireless network adapter are required to set were developed by a working group tasked with adapting and
up a core network of this type. Wi-Fi in its reach, data transfer promoting the NB-IoT system, consisting of the network
speed, and market penetration is a key technology available in providers Tele2, Telit, T-Mobile, and the founders of Ericsson,
the market today [35-37]. Huawei, Nokia [15].
D. Cellular 3G/4G/5G LTE G. ZigBee
The cellular network is a large area covered by radio waves The network originated in the early 21st century in the USA.
that are divided into defined shapes and sizes called cells. Each It was standardized in 2003 by IEEE. ZigBee is a wireless
area has one transceiver (base station), which connects one network that has taken its place in the market by its specific
device to another in the same or different cell. Such networks features. While other wireless networks have tried for years to
offer low energy consumption and a large coverage area. The introduce new features and improve their performance, ZigBee
cellular network first appeared in the 1990s under the has remained focused on 8bit microcontrollers. The most
designation 1G (First generation). Since then, up to the present famous feature of this network is the long life of the device. The
day, new versions (2G, 3G, 4G) are emerging, as well as inter- lifespan can be long up to 10 years or even more. ZigBee is
versions, which differ in characteristics, primarily by similar to Bluetooth technology but has features such as low data
transmission mode (analog-digital) and power consumption rate, and therefore stands high with transfer reliability and good
[25]. 5G and LTE represent the latest generation of cellular price. Although not used to transmit large amounts of data, some
technologies and are popular with mobile phones and IoT versions of the ZigBee protocol have been modified for such use.
devices that require high bandwidth. 5G networks, compared to Due to its characteristics, it is often used for sensor networks and
the previous generation, provide more speed and more channels, the transmission distance is up to 100 meters if there is good
which results in increased capacity and allows more devices to optical visibility [16].
connect [38, 39].
 TABLE I. COMPARATION OF WIRELESS COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES

Parameters
Wireless Communication
Technologies Cost per Example of
Range Bandwidth Reliability Latency Power use Coverage
module use
Blood pressure
Bluetooth Low Energy < 10 m < 2.4 GHz Medium < 10 ms Low Small $2 – $5
measurement
Reader $5 - $40 Mobile
Near-field Communication (NFC) < 4 cm 13.56 MHz High 100 ~ 250 ms Very Low Very small
Tag < $1 payments
Ground
ZigBee < 100 m < 2.4 GHz High < 20 ms Low Small $1 - $5 parking
sensors
Remote control
Wi-Fi < 100 m 2.4 GHz – 5 GHz High < 10 ms Medium Small $1 - $10
robot car
5 km urban Smart trash
LoRaWAN 500 KHz – 900 MHz Medium 1 ~ 10 s Low Large $2 – $25
20 km rural bins
Smart
Narrow-band IoT (NB-IoT) > 10 km 450 MHz-3.5 GHz High 1.5 ~ 10 s Low High $5 – $30
warehouse
10 km urban Smart
SigFox 100 Hz – 900 MHz Medium 1 ~ 30 s Low Large $4 – $60
50 km rural wineyards
Forest fire
3g/4g/LTE > 30 km 200 KHz – 900 MHz High 100 ms ~ 1 s Low-High Large $4 – $35
detection

for the design of systems operating in urban

H. SigFox environments (significant signal interference).
Sigfox is an LPWAN network created in 2009. It was the • As a common feature of all available technologies, it is
first private LPWAN network to appear in the IoT market. There relatively high reliability that has evolved over the
are two ways to operate a network. The first where SigFox is the years. It can be said that reliability across all networks
provider and the second where SigFox has its exclusive dealers. is relatively high.
SigFox uses different frequency bands depending on location, • Latency vary depending on the technology, but the
e.g. 868 MHz ISM in Europe and 900 MHz ISM in North general conclusion that can be defined concerning the
America. SigFox has designed a long-range communication area of technology application is that all networks are of
system. Long-distance data transmission is "paid for" by the the appropriate latency. Although some of the
speed of data transmission. This is accomplished by working on technologies, especially LPWAN (Lora, SigFox) have
sub-GHz bands and using UNB (Ultra Narrow Band) in higher latency than others, the same does not present a
combination with simple modulation techniques. Today, SigFox problem in the mentioned networks due to their purpose
is present in about 50 countries worldwide. Due to their or application (significantly lower data transfer).
popularity, some countries have invested in network • From an energy efficiency standpoint, there are major
infrastructure to provide their citizens with access to the SigFox differences, and they appear due to the extent of data
network (eg. Belgium) [15]. transmission. The greater the amount of data transferred
is proportional to the higher power consumption and
V. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF WIRELESS COMMUNI- vice versa.
CATION TECHNOLOGIES • Coverage, as well as reach, are highly inconsistent and
Comparative analysis should answer a series of questions directly dependent on the application domain.
that arise in the design process of an IoT network, and provide • The price depends on a number of factors, primarily
designers with insights into the features of currently available hardware components and communication modules
wireless communication technologies. Therefore, the design (integrated or external hardware), and is not related to
process would be much easier as well as the choice of optimal any of the comparison criteria. Also, the number of
technology when designing solutions. For the predefined IoT devices, the purpose of the IoT network, geographical
network parameters that need to be analyzed depending on the location, etc. have a significant impact on the price.
problem domain, as well as for the currently available
VI. CONCLUSION
technologies, a comparative analysis is provided in table Table1.
There is no single solution for wireless communications
Based on the defined table, it is possible to define the technologies that can be optimal for all types of IoT systems.
following conclusions:
Choosing the right one depends largely on the user requirements,
• From a range point of view, there is a great disparity in
the technologies available, because depending on its as well as other external factors. Thus, in some cases, RFID may
range, the range can vary from a few centimeters to tens be the ideal solution, while in other cases it is SigFox.
of kilometers. When choosing communication technology, it is necessary
• Bandwidth is broad-spectrum and depending on the to carry out detailed planning and analysis of the problem
technology used, different bands are used that may domain to be solved, after which a case study should be defined
belong to a group of licensed or unlicensed spectrum. to justify the choice or to make corrections. When choosing
Each has its advantages and disadvantages, especially optimal communication technology in IoT systems, preference
is given, if possible, to low power consumption, availability, [21] Z. Sheng, C. Mahapatra, C. Zhu and V. C. M. Leung, "Recent Advances
high reliability and cost of hardware. In this way, it is possible in Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks Toward Efficient Management in
IoT," in IEEE Access, vol. 3, pp. 622-637, 2015.
to optimally match the criteria of the IoT network and choose
[22] N. Chhabra, "Comparative Analysis of Different Wireless Technologies",
the best one for the designed system. Int. J. Sci. Res. in Network Security and Communication", vol. 1, no. 5,
2013, pp. 13-17.
REFERENCES
[23] C. Saad, B. Mostafa, El A. Cheikh and H. Abderrahmane, "Comparative
[1] J. A. Alzubi, R. Manikandan, O. A. Alzubi, N. Gayathri and R. Patan, "A Performance Analysis of Wireless Communication Protocols for
Survey of Specific IoT Applications", International Journal on Emerging Intelligent Sensors and Their Applications", (IJACSA) International
Technologies 10(1), 2019, pp: 47-53 Journal of Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol. 5, No. 4,
[2] H. D. Kotha, V. M. Gupta, "IoT Application, A Survey", International 2014, pp. 76-85.
Journal of Engineering & Technology, 7 (2.7), 2018, pp. 891-896. [24] V. S. Anusha, G. K. Nithya and S. N. Rao, "Comparative Analysis of
[3] E. D. Kavyashree, H. D. Vidyashree and B. H. Anil Kumar, "A Survey of Wireless Technology Options for Rural Connectivity," 2017 IEEE 7th
Internet of Things (IoT) - Applications, Merits, Demerits & Challenges", International Advance Computing Conference (IACC), Hyderabad, 2017,
International Journal of Innovative Research in Computer and pp. 402-407.
Communication Engineering Vol. 6, Issue 2, 2018, pp. 903-907. [25] M. Saradeep, P.V. Yashwanth and T. Pavan, "Comparative Analysis of
[4] S. Balaji, K. Nathani and R. Santhakumar,"IoT Technology, Applications Digital Wireless Mobile Technology: A Survey", International Journal of
and Challenges: A Contemporary Survey", Wireless Pers Commun 108, Innovative Technology and Exploring Engineering (IJITEE), vol.8,
2019, pp. 363–388. no.6C2, 2019, pp. 268-173.
[5] S. H. Shah and I. Yaqoob, "A Survey: Internet of Things (IOT) [26] S. Orike and T. J. Alalibo, "Comparative Analysis of Computer Network
Technologies, Applications and Challenges", 4th IEEE International Protocols in Wireless Communication Technology" International Journal
Conference on Smart Energy Grid Engineering, 2016, pp. 381-385. of Electronics Communication and Computer Engineering, vol.10, no.3,
2019, pp. 76-85.
[6] U. Sendler, "The Internet of Things Industrie 4.0 Unleashed", Springer-
Verlag GmbH Germany, 2016. [27] D. Bhavsar, H. Patel and H. Modi, "Emerging Wireless Technologies: A
Comparative Analysis", Journal of Emerging Technologies and
[7] K. S. Mohamed, "The Era of Internet of Things Towards a Smart World",
Innovative Research (JETIR), vol. 3, no. 4, 2016, pp. 300-304.
Springer Nature Switzerland AG, 2019.
[28] A. Abbas, M. T. Jilani, and M. K. Khan, "Comparative Analysis of
[8] K. Sohraby, D. Minoli i T. Ynati, "Wireless Sensor Networks:
Wireless Technologies for Internet-of-Things Based Smart Farm," Sci.
Technology, Protocols, and Applications", John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
Int., vol. 29, 2017, pp. 373-378.
[9] F. Hussain, "Internet of Things Building Blocks and Business Models",
[29] "BLUETOOTH LOW ENERGY IOS, Android examples", online:
Springer, 2017.
https://os.mbed.com/media/uploads/leonardoaraujosantos/bluetooth_low
[10] A. Raza, Ataul Aziz Ikram, Asfand Amin and Ahmad Jamal Ikram, "A _energy.pdf, [Available: Januar 2020].
Review of Low Cost and Power Efficient Development Boards for IoT
Applications", Future Technologies Conference 2016, pp. 786-790. [30] C. Gomez, J. Oller and J. Paradells, "Overview and Evaluation of
Bluetooth Low Energy: An Emerging Low-Power Wireless Technology",
[11] S. J. Johnston, M. Apetroaie-Cristea, M. Scott and S. J. Cox, Sensors, vol. 12, 2012, 12, pp.11734-11753.
"Applicability of commodity, low cost, single board computers for
[31] B. Bilginer and P. Ljunggren, "An introduction to Near Field Communica-
Internet of Things devices" 2016 IEEE 3rd World Forum on Internet of
tion", online:
Things (WF-IoT), Reston, VA, 2016, pp. 141-146.
https://lup.lub.lu.se/luur/download?func=downloadFile&recordOId=227
[12] M. S. Mahmoud, A. A. H. Mohamad, "A Study of Efficient Power 4992&fileOId=3629824, [Available: Januar 2020].
Consumption Wireless Communication Techniques/ Modules for Internet
[32] N. H. Motlagh, “Near field communication (NFC) A Technical
of Things (IoT) Applications", Advances in Internet of Things, 2016, vol.
overview”, University of VAASA, Faculty of technology,
6, pp. 19-29.
Telecommunication engineering, May 2012.
[13] R. S. Sinha, Y. Wei and S.-H. Hwang, "A survey on LPWA technology:
[33] “Near Field Communication”, online:
LoRa and NB-IoT", ICT The Korean Institute of Communications
http://www.sacg.com.tw/sacweb/marcom/epaper/images/NFC.pdf,
Information Sciences, Publishing Services by Elsevier B.V. (2017), pp.
[Available: Januar 2020].
14–21.
[34] K. Curran, A. Millar and C. M. Garvey, “Near Field Communication”,
[14] V. Vujović, "Modelom upravljani razvoj arhitekture Senzor Web mreža",
International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE),
University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Science, 2016.
vol.2, no.3, 2012, pp. 371-382.
[15] D. Sjöström, "Unlicensed and licensed low-power wide area networks,
[35] “Wireless Technologies for IoT”, online:
Exploring the candidates for massive IoT", Degree project in Computer
https://iot.electronicsforu.com/expert-opinion/wireless-technologies-iot/,
Science and Computer Engineering, second level stockholm, Sweden
[Available: Januar 2020].
2017.
[16] D. Gislason, “Zigbee wireless Networking”, Burling, MA USA 2008. [36] “Choose the Right IoT Wireless Connectivity Protocol”, online:
https://abracon.com/news/choose-the-right-iot-wireless-connectivity-
[17] K. Mekkia, E. Bajica, F. Chaxela and F. Meyerb, "A comparative study protocol, [Available: Januar 2020].
of LPWAN technologies for large-scale IoT deployment", The Korean
[37] S. Song and B. Issac, “Analysis Of Wifi And Wimax And Wireless
Institute of Communications and Information Sciences (KICS).
Network Coexistence”, International Journal of Computer Networks &
Publishing Services by Elsevier B.V. (2019), pp. 1–7.
Communications(IJCNC), vol.6, no.6, 2014.
[18] U. Raza, P. Kulkarni and M. Sooriyabandara, "Low Power Wide Area
[38] O. Obinnaa, S. Palaniappana and A. Abubakara, “Overview of Cellular
Networks: An Overview", in IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials,
Network: Impact of GSM to the economic Growth in Nigeria”, Journal of
vol. 19, no. 2, 2017, pp. 855-873.
Advanced & Applied Sciences (JAAS), vol. 2, no. 6, 2014, pp. 192-204.
[19] D. M. Ibrahim, "Internet of Things Technology based on LoRaWAN
[39] R. K. Singh and R. Singh, “4G LTE Cellular Technology: Network
Revolution", 10th International Conference on Information and
Architecture and Mobile Standards”, International Journal of Emerging
Communication Systems (ICICS), 2019, pp. 234-237.
Research in Management & Technology, vol. 5, no.12.
[20] S. Al-Sarawi, M. Anbar, K. Alieyan and M. Alzubaidi, "Internet of Things
(IoT) Communication Protocols:Review", 8th International Conference
on Information Technology (ICIT), 2017, pp. 685-690.