International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)

Volume 182 – No. 46, March 2019

A Review of Link Layer Protocols for Internet of Things

Raja Abdelmoumen
Higher Institute of Technological Studies of Sousse
ISET of Sousse, Tunisia

ABSTRACT this study, link layer protocols are classified into two groups
Internet of Things (IoT) consists of smart objects that defined according to their range coverage: short and long
communicate together, collect and exchange data. IoT has range following the work in [6].
now a wide range of domain applications such as industry, The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2
logistics, healthcare, smart environment, as well as personal, expands a study of short range link layer protocols. A study of
social gaming robot, and smart city. The characteristics long range link layer protocols is presented in Section 3.
required by applications, such as coverage area, transmission Section 4 gives a comparison about short and long range IoT
data rate, and applicability, refer to the link layer designs of link layer protocols arising from their main characteristics.
protocols. This paper presents a study of proposed link layer Finally, Section 5 concludes this study.
protocols that are used in IoT grouped by short and long
distance coverage. For short range protocols, this article study 2. SHORT RANGE LINK LAYER
the following: Radio Frequency Identification (RFID), Near
Field Communication (NFC), Bluetooth Low Energy (BLE),
PROTOCOLS
Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (LR-WPANs), 2.1 RFID
Z-Wave and IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n/ah. For the long range RFID (Radio Frequency Identification) is a radio frequency
protocols, Narrow Band IoT (NB-IoT), Long Term Evolution identification technology that allows identifying objects when
(LTE), Long Range Protocol (LoRa), and SigFox protocols they pass near a detector (antenna, terminal, smartphone,
are considered. A comparative study is performed for each tablet, etc.). An RFID system is basically composed of two
group of protocols, considering their characteristics in order to types of devices: the identified devices called RFID tags and
provide a guideline for researchers and application developers the device identifiers or readers. The RFID reader transmits a
to select the right communication protocol for different query signal to the tag and receives a reflected signal which in
applications. turn is passed to a specific computer application called the
Object-Naming Services (ONS) as is shown in Figure 1. An
General Terms ONS looks up the tag details from a database to identify
Internet and Distributed Computer Systems, Computer objects based on the reflected signals within a 10 cm to 200 m
Networks, Communication Protocols. range [7].

Keywords
IoT, communication protocols, short range protocols, long
range protocols, RFID, NFC, BLE, LR-WPANs, Z-Wave,
IEEE 802.11 ah, NB-IoT, LTE/LTE-A, LoRaWAN, Sigfox.

1. INTRODUCTION
With an accelerated rate, a large number of physical objects
are being connected to the Internet realizing the concept of the
Internet of Things (IoT) [1] [2]. Physical objects are smart and
they can connect, transfer information and make decisions on
behalf of the people. This new technology is called Fig 1: RFID system
connectivity for anything and it can connect anywhere,
anytime and anything. Different classifications of RFID systems can be made
according to the operating frequency, radio interface,
IoT communication technologies connect heterogeneous communication range or tag autonomy (completely passive,
objects to provide specific smart services. Typically, IoT semi-passive, and active).
applications include transport tracking, smart healthcare,
industrial automation, smart city and emergency. To provide There are two types of RFID standards: standards that manage
specific smart services, IoT objects should operate in different communications between tags, readers and information
environments with many constraints. Processing capability, systems and standards that manage the coding of information
lossy and noisy communication links and low power are in the tag memory. There are two international organizations
among these constraints. Therefore, the IoT implementation that are working on these standards: the joint ISO / IEC
requires communication protocols that can efficiently manage working group and GS1 Global. These independent
these constraints [3], [4], [5]. organizations work together and published standards are fully
compatible. The main standards produced are ISO/IEC 15961,
This article reviews and compares IoT link layer protocols in ISO/IEC 18000, ISO/IEC22000, etc.
order to provide a guideline for researchers and application
developers to select the right communication protocol without Evolution of smart UHF (Ultra High Frequencies) RFID tags
having to go through RFCs and the standard specifications. with embedded sensors and miniaturization of readers
Indeed, features such as range, date rate, power consumption, promotes this technology for high pervasive IoT ecosystems
license and security are important issues in the definition or [8]. Some of IoT applications using RFID include smart
the choice of a certain technology for a particular solution. In shopping, health care, national security and agriculture.

22
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 182 – No. 46, March 2019

2.2 NFC build a complete network protocol stack for WSNs. Figure 2
NFC (Near Field Communication) is based on the ISO/IEC shows 6LowPAN and ZigBee protocol stack.
18092:2004 standard and this technology is created on the
RFID to enable a short-range communication (no more than
some centimeters). While NFC uses similar technology
principles in RFID, it is not only used for identification but
also for more elaborate two-way communication [9].
Each NFC tag has a unique identifier and can contain small
amount of data. This tag can be read only (similar to RFID
tags for identification purposes) or can be changed later by the
device .There are three main operating modes for NFC: card
emulation mode (passive mode), reader/writer mode (active
mode) and peer-to peer mode. NFC technology is extensively
used in mobile phones, industrial applications and contactless
payment systems. In the same way, NFC makes it easier to
connect, commission, and control IoT devices in different
environments like home, factory and the work.

2.3 BLE Fig 2: ZigBee and 6LowPAN protocol stack

BLE (Bluetooth Low-Energy) called also Bluetooth Smart, is
a communication technology for short distances using short-
2.5 Z-Wave
Z-Wave is a low power wireless protocol operating in the ISM
wavelength radio with a minimal amount of power. Bluetooth
(Industrial, Scientific and Medical) bands (around 900 MHz).
SIG (Special Interest Group) proposed BLE in the Bluetooth
4.0 specification to enable collecting data from devices Z-Wave is designed for battery or electrically powered
(sensors) which generate data at a very low rate. Its coverage devices and widely used for Home Automation Networks
range (about 100 meters) is ten times that of the classic (HAN) as well as small-size commercial domains. This
Bluetooth while its latency is 15 times shorter [10]. Previous protocol is a proprietary standard based on the ITU G.9959
studies, such as [11], [12], [13], and [14] have presented some specification [19].
of BLE functionalities with the conclusion of being a good
option for some IoT case studies. IETF 6LoWPAN WG Z-Wave covers about 30 meter point-to-point communication
developed specification (RFC7668) that enables transmission and is specified for applications that need tiny data
IPv6 packets over BLE [15] that empowered the IoT transmission (about 40 kbps) like light control, household
capabilities of this technology. New version Bluetooth 5 appliance control, smart energy, access control, wearable
focuses on improvement of speed, range, security, energy health care control, and fire detection [20]. This protocol was
efficiency, location- based functionalities, interoperability and initially developed by ZenSys (currently Sigma Designs) and
coexistence with other technologies. It brings some major later was employed and improved by Z-Wave Alliance [21].
advances in the technology to make it a key enabler of IoT. In the architecture of Z-Wave, there are controller and slave
nodes. Controllers manage the slaves by sending commands
2.4 LR-WPANs to them. Z-Wave devices are arranged in mesh network
LR-WPANs refers to Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area topology. They can send and receive messages from any
Networks. The IEEE 802.15.4 standard [16] specifies both a device that is connected to the network [22].
physical layer, and a medium access control for LR-WPANs.
Due to its specifications such as low power consumption, low 2.6 IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n/ah
data rate, low cost, and high message throughput, it is also IEEE 802.11 is certainly the most exploited standards for
utilized by the IoT, M2M, and WSNs. It provides a reliable WLAN (Wireless Local Area Network) mostly known as Wi-
communication, operability on different platforms, and can Fi (Wireless Fidelity). IEEE 802.11 is set of MAC and PHY
handle a large number of nodes (about 65 000). It also specifications.
provides a high level of security, encryption and 802.11a standard is published in 1999. It allows a theoretical
authentication services. However, it does not provide QoS
throughput of 54 Mbps and a real throughput of 27 Mbps
guarantees. within a radius of approximately 10 meters.
Topologies of IEEE 802.15.4 networks are star, peer-to-peer The 802.11b standard was the most widespread Wi-Fi
(mesh), and cluster-tree. The star topology contains at least standard installed since the early 2000s. It offers a theoretical
one FFD (Full Function Device) and some RFDs (Reduced
peak throughput of 11 Mbps (6 Mbps real) with a range of up
Function Device). The FFD who works as a PAN coordinator to 300 meters (in theory) in an open environment.
should be located at the center of topology and aims to
manage and control all the other nodes in the network. The Published in 2003, the 802.11g standard provides a higher
peer-to-peer topology contains a PAN coordinator and other throughput (54 Mbps theoretical and 25 Mbps real). 802.11g
nodes communicate with each other in the same network or is compatible with 802.11b11. This ability allows equipment
through intermediate nodes to other networks. A cluster-tree to offer 802.11g while remaining compatible with existing
topology is a special case of the peer-to-peer topology and 802.11b networks.
consists of a PAN coordinator, a cluster head and normal
nodes. The IEEE 802.11n standard, ratified in September 2009,
achieves a theoretical throughput of up to 450 Mbps on each
Both ZigBee [17] and 6LoWPAN [18] protocols uses IEEE of the usable frequency bands (2.4 GHz and 5 GHz). It
802.15.4 as physical and medium access control layers and improves the previous standards: IEEE 802.11a for the 5 GHz

23
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 182 – No. 46, March 2019

frequency band, IEEE 802.11b and IEEE 802.11g for the 2.4 [35]. It operates on the 433MHz, 868MHz or 915MHz ISM
GHz frequency band. bands, depending on the region in which it is deployed. The
payload of each transmission can range from 2–255 octets,
IEEE 802.11ah standard [23], ratified in May 2017. 802.11ah and the data rate can reach up to 50 Kbps when channel
also called Low-Power Wi-Fi specifies a throughput up to 4 aggregation is employed. The modulation technique is a
Mbit/s in the ISM frequency band of 900 MHz. This new proprietary technology from Semtech.
standard supports a wide range of IoT applications while
being able to provide more energy efficiency, QoS, scalability LoRaWAN provides a medium access control mechanism,
(a large number of devices) and cost-effective solutions [24] enabling many end devices to communicate with a gateway
[25]. using the LoRa modulation. While the LoRa modulation is
proprietary, the LoRaWAN is an open standard being
3. LONG RANGE LINK LAYER developed by the LoRa Alliance.
PROTOCOLS The LoRaWAN specification defines three device types: class
3.1 Nb-IoT A, class B and class C. All LoRaWAN devices must
NB-IoT (Narrow Band Internet of Things) is a low-cost, low- implement Class A, whereas Class B and Class C are
power, wide-area cellular connectivity for the Internet of extensions to the specification of Class A devices. Figure 3
Things [26]. NB-IoT is developed by 3GPP (3rd Generation presents a representation of LoRa and LoRaWAN protocol
Partnership Project) to enable a wide range of cellular devices stacks as given in [6].
and services [27]. The 3GPP Rel-13, published in June 2016,
introduces NB-IoT. This system, based on Long Term
Evolution (LTE) technology, supports most LTE
functionalities, although with essential simplifications to
reduce device complexity. Further optimizations to increase
coverage, reduce overhead and reduce power consumption
while increasing capacity have been introduced as well. The
design objectives of NB-IoT include low complexity devices,
high coverage, long device battery life, and massive capacity.
Latency is relaxed although a delay budget of 10 seconds is
the target for exception reports [28]. Figure 3. LoRa and LoRaWAN protocol stack [6]

3.2 LTE/LTE-A 3.4 Sigfox

LTE (Long-Term Evolution) is a standard wireless Sigfox is a french telecommunications operator of the Internet
communication for high-speed data transfer between mobile of Things created in 2009 [36]. Sigfox operates in the 868-
phones based on GSM/UMTS network technologies [29]. It MHz frequency band, with the spectrum divided into 400
can cover fast travelling devices and provide multicasting and channels of 100 Hz. Each end-device can send up to 140
broadcasting services. LTE-A (LTE Advanced) [30] is an messages per day, with a payload size of 12 octets, at a data
improved version of LTE, including bandwidth extension, rate up to 100 bps. Sigfox claims that each access point can
which supports up to 100 MHz, downlink and uplink spatial handle up to a million end-devices, with a coverage area of
multiplexing, extended coverage, higher throughput and lower 30–50 km in rural areas and 3–10 km in urban areas.
latencies. LTE-A encompasses a set of cellular SigFox protocol stack is composed of three main layers:
communication protocols that fit well for Machine-Type Frame, MAC and Physical layers. Figure 4 depicts the
Communications (MTC) and IoT infrastructures, especially comparison between SigFox and the OSI reference model.
for smart cities where long term durability of infrastructure is
expected [31]. Moreover, it outperforms other cellular
solutions in terms of service cost and scalability. At the
physical layer, LTE-A uses orthogonal frequency division
multiple access (OFDMA) by which the channel bandwidth is
partitioned into smaller bands called physical resource blocks
(PRB).

3.3 LoRa/LoRaWAN
LoRa (Long Range) is a long-range wireless communications
system, promoted by the LoRa Alliance. This system aims at
being used in long-lived battery-powered devices, where the
energy consumption is of paramount importance [32]. LoRa
refers to two distinct layers:
• A physical layer using the Chirp Spread Spectrum (CSS)
[33] radio modulation technique
• A MAC layer protocol LoRaWAN (Long Range Wide-Area
Network) [34].
Figure 4. Sigfox and OSI stack
The LoRa physical layer, developed by Semtech, allows for
long-range, low-power and low-throughput communications

24
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 182 – No. 46, March 2019

IEEE
RFID NFC BLE LR-WPANs Z-Wave
802.11 ah
ISO/IEC
ISO/IEC 14443, IEEE ITU G.9959 IEEE 802.11
Standard 15961,18000, IEEE 802.15.4
18092 802.15.1 ah
22000

LF: 120-150 kHz

HF: 13.56 MHz
UHF: 433 MHz
ISM EU: 865-868
EU: 868 MHz EU: 868 MHz
Frequency MHz
13.56 MHz 2.4 GHz NA: 915MHz NA: 908 MHz 900 MHz
band ISM NA: 902 -
Global : 2.4GHz
928 MHz
SHF: 2.45 - 5.8
GHz
ULB: 3.1-10 GHz

106 Kb/s or
4 Mb/s
Data rate 4 Mb/s 212 Kb/s or 1 Mb/s 250 kb/s 9 -40 kb/s
424 Kb/s

100 m 30m (indoors)

Range Up to 200m 0-10 cm 10-100m 100m
(outdoors) 100m (outdoors)

<10 mW -
Transmission
1.5 mW 23 dBm 0-10 dBm 0-20dBm 0 dBm <1W (local
power regulations)

BPSK, QPSK,
Proximity Field O-QPSK
Transmission GFSK FSK 16-QAM, 64-
Modulation ASK GFSK
Technique FHSS Star GFSK QAM, 256-
Induced Pulse BPSK
QAM, OFDM

Point to Point
Star – Bus
Topology Point to Peer-to-Peer Mesh Mesh Star
Network
Multipoint

8 to 47
Packet length 16-64 Kb Variable 100 bytes 255 bits 100 bytes
bytes

Clandestine
Encryption
Tracking and
Cryptographic,
Security Inventorying EPC AES-128 AES-128 AES-128 WPA
Secure Channel,
Discovery
Key Agreements
Service

License Free Free Free Free Free Free

25
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 182 – No. 46, March 2019

Payment, Multimedia
Tracking,
Healthcare, data Home and M2M, V2V
Identification, Automation in
Common Smart exchange industry applications
Human residential and
Applications Environment, between monitoring and and smart
Implantation light commercial
Mobile Ticketing nearby controlling grids
and loyalty nodes

Fig 5: Comparison of the short range protocols

4. COMPARISON BETWEEN LINK

LAYER PROTOCOLS FOR IOT
This section presents a comparison of link layer protocols The comparison of long range link protocols involves the
studied in this review considering both groups, defined same criteria used for short protocols. Figure 6 presents a
according to their range coverage: short and long range. This comparison of long range protocols studied in this review.
comparison can provide a guideline for researchers and In terms of security, all the four long range protocols perform
application developers to select the right communication the encryption through AES and authentication mechanisms.
protocol without having to go through RFCs and the standard
specifications. In terms of data rate, all the four studied protocols operate
under a data rate of 1 Mbps. This low date rate is sufficient in
4.1 Short Range Link Protocols the context of the IoT object communication.
Different criteria are used to compare the studied link layer
protocols. Such criteria include standard, frequency band, In terms of power consumption, NB-IoT and LTE-A use a
data rate, range, transmission technique, topology, packet transmission power equal to 23 dBm while the transmission
length, power consumption, security, license and common power of LoRaWAN and Sigfox depends on the region. In
applications. Figure 5 presents a comparison of short range Europe, LoRaWAN operates at 13 dBm and Sigfox at 14dBm.
protocols studied in this review. The power transmission is higher in the United States, where
In terms of security, all the six short range link protocols a value of 22 dBm is required for Sigfox and 20dBm for
perform the encryption and authentication mechanisms. BLE, LoRaWAN. All transmission powers of the studied protocols
LR-WAN, NFC and Z-Wave use the Advanced Encryption are low and adapted to the IoT devices.
Standard (AES), which is extremely secure. RFID uses RC4 5. CONCLUSION
(Rivest Cipher 4) which is very fast compared to AES but not Many link layer protocols are proposed for IoT and each one
secure enough. IEEE 802.11ah uses the WPA (Wi-Fi has its specifications, its advantages and its cons. But, it is
Protected Access) which is the common security standard for quite hard to conclude which one is perfect. Hence, the
Wi-Fi protocols. In terms of data rate, NFC, BLE, LR- question that someone needs to answer is which protocol is
WPANs and Z-Wave have a data rate less than 1 Mbps. the best one for my application. In this context, this article
However, RFID and IEEE 802.11 ah have the highest data reviews and compares the common communication protocols
rate of 4 Mbps. Although the offered date rate of all presented proposed in the literature for IoT.
protocols is reduced, but it remains sufficient in the context of Different criteria are used to make the comparison between
the IoT object communication. link layer protocols such as standard, frequency band, data
In terms of power consumption, since BLE, LR-WPANs, Z- rate, coverage range, transmission technique, topology, packet
length, power consumption, security, license and common
Wave and IEEE 802.11ah are designed for mobile devices and
applications.
limited battery power, they offer low power consumption.
RFID and NFC protocols provide low power consumption. In the future work, this study can be extended to review IoT
4.2 Long Range Link Protocols application protocols and IoT security mechanisms.
NB-IoT LTE/LTE-A LoRaWAN Sigfox
Standard 3GPP 3GPP LoRaWAN Sigfox
EU : 868 MHz
Frequency EU : 868 MHz
Licensed Licensed US : 433/915 MHz
band US : 902 MHz
AS : 430 MHz
DL: 234.7 kb/s UL : 100 bps
Data rate DL /UL : 1 Mb/s 100 kb/s
UL: 204.8 kb/s DL: 600 bps
5 km (urban) 10 Km (Urban)
Range 20 km 5 km
15 km LOS 50 Km (Rural)

Transmission EU: 13 dBm EU:14 dBm

23 dBm 23 dBm
power US: 20 dBm US: 22 dBm

Transmission GFSK, BPSK OFDMA CSS UL: DBPSK

26
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 182 – No. 46, March 2019

Technique FDD SC-FDMA FHSS DL: GFSK

FDD/TDD UNB
Topology Star Star Star of stars Star
Network Network UL: 12 Bytes
Packet length 255 Bytes
Deployment Driven Deployment Driven DL: 8 Bytes

NSA Key Generation, Message

Security AES 256 AES CCM 128 Encryption, MAC
AES 256 Verification, Sequence
Technology freely Technology freely
Technology freely
available for chip/device available for chip/device Technology licensed by available for chip/device
vendors. vendors. device vendors. No
License vendors.
Network operators owns Network operators owns royalty to be paid by
network operators Networks operators pay
and manages its and manages its
royalty to Sigfox
networks networks
Building Automation and Building Automation and
M2M, Tracking, Smart M2M, Tracking, Smart Security, Smart Metering, Security, Smart Metering,
Common Things, Point Of Sales Things, Point Of Sales Land Agriculture, White Land Agriculture, White
Applications (POS) terminals, Mobile (POS) terminals, Mobile Goods, Household Goods, Household
Applications Applications Information Devices, Information Devices,
Tracking, Positioning Tracking, Positioning

Fig 6: Comparison of the long range protocols

6. REFERENCES Sensor Nets. Proceedings of the IEEE, Volume 98, Issue

[1] Al-Sarawi, A., Anbar, M., Alieyan, K., Alzubaidi, A., 9 , Sept. 2010, pp. 1583–1592.
2017 Internet of Things (IoT) communication protocols: [9] Coskun, V., Ozdenizci, B., and Ok, K., 2013. A Survey
Review. 2017 8th International Conference on on Near Field Communication (NFC) Technology.
Information Technology (ICIT), Amman, 2017, pp. 685- Wireless Personal Communications, Aug. 2013, Volume
690. 71, Issue 3, pp. 2259–2294.
[2] Al-Fuqaha, A.,Guizani, M.,Mohammadi, M.,Aledhari, [10] Frank, R., Bronzi, W., Castignani G.,Engel, T., 2014
M., Ayyash, M., 2015 Internet of Things: A Survey on Bluetooth low energy: An alternative technology for
Enabling Technologies, Protocols, and Applications. VANET applications. 2014 11th Annual Conference on
IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, Volume 17, Wireless On-demand Network Systems and Services
Issue 4, Fourth Quarter 2015, pp. 2347-2376. (WONS), Obergurgl, 2014, pp. 104-107.
[3] Tan, L., Wang, N., 2010. Future internet: The Internet of [11] Raza, S., Misra, P., He, Z., Voigt, T., 2015. Bluetooth
Things. 2010 3rd International Conference on Advanced smart: an enabling technology for the Internet of Things.
Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), Chengdu, 2015 IEEE 11th International Conference on Wireless
2010, pp. V5-376-V5-380. and Mobile Computing, Networking and
[4] Colakovic, A., Hadzialic, M., 2018. Internet of Things Communications (WiMob), Abu Dhabi, Oct. 2015, pp.
(IoT): A review of enabling technologies, challenges, 155-162.
and open research issues. Computer Networks, Volume [12] DeCuir, J., 2014. Introducing Bluetooth Smart: Part 1: A
144, 24 October 2018, pp. 17-39. look at both classic and new technologies. IEEE
[5] Haroon, A., Shah, M.A., Asim, Y., Naeem, W., Kamran, Consumer Electronics Magazine, Volume 3, Issue 1, Jan.
M., Javaid, Q., 2016. Constraints in the IoT: the world in 2014, pp. 12-18.
2020 and beyond. (IJACSA) International Journal of [13] Mackensen, E.,Lai, M.,Wendt, T. M., 2012. Bluetooth
Advanced Computer Science and Applications, Vol. 7, Low Energy (BLE) based wire-less sensors. Sensors,
No. 11, pp. 252-271. 2012 IEEE, Taipei, Oct. 2012, pp. 1–4.
[6] Oliveira, L., Rodrigues, J.J.P.C., Kozlov, S.A., Rabêlo, [14] Al Kalaa, M.O.,Balid, W.,Bitar, N.,Refai, H.H., 2016.
R.A.L., Albuquerque, V.H.C., 2019 MAC Layer Evaluating Bluetooth Low Energy in realistic wireless
Protocols for Internet of Things: A Survey. Future environments. 2016 IEEE Wireless Communications and
Internet 2019, 11, 16. Networking Conference, Doha, Apr. 2016, pp. 1-6.
[7] Want, R., 2006. An introduction to RFID technology. [15] Nieminen, J., Savolainen, T., Isomaki, M., Patil, B.,
IEEE Pervasive Computing, Volume 5, Issue 1, Jan.- Shelby, Z., Gomez, C. 2015. IPv6 over bluetooth(r) low
Mar. 2006, pp. 25-33. energy. IETF 6Lo Working Group, RFC 7886, Oct.
[8] Roy, S., Jandhyala, V., Smith, J.R., Wetherall, D.J., Otis, 2015. Available online: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7668
B.P., Chakraborty, R.,Buettner, M.,Yeager, D.J., Ko, (Accessed on 20 February 2019)
Y.C., Sample, A.P., 2010. RFID: From Supply Chains to

27
 International Journal of Computer Applications (0975 – 8887)
Volume 182 – No. 46, March 2019

[16] IEEE Std 802.15.4, IEEE Standard for Local and Communication Workshop (ICCW), London, Jun 2015,
metropolitan area networks—Part 15.4: Low-Rate pp. 1149-1154.
Wireless Personal Area Networks (LR-WPANs). IEEE
Standard, Sep. 2011. Available online: [26] Ratasuk, R., Vejlgaard, B., Mangalvedhe, N., Ghosh, A.,
https://standards.ieee.org/content/ieee- 2016. NB-IoT system for M2M communication. 2016
standards/en/standard/802_15_4-2011.html (Accessed on IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking
20 February 2019) Conference Workshops (WCNCW), Doha, Apr. 2016,
pp. 428-432.
[17] ZIGBEE SPECIFICATION, 2012, Available online:
https://www.zigbee.org/download/standards-zigbee- [27] Gozalvez, J., 2016. New 3GPP Standard for IoT [Mobile
specification/ (Accessed on 20 February 2019) Radio]. IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine, Volume
11, Issue 1, , Mar. 2016, pp. 14-20.
[18] Kushalnagar, N., Montenegro, G.,Schumacher, C, 2007.
IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks [28] Ratasuk, R., Mangalvedhe, N., Zhang, Y., Robert, M.,
(6LoWPANs): Overview, Assumptions, Problem Koskinen, J.P., 2016. Overview of narrowband IoT in
Statement, and Goals. RFC4919. IETF Aug 2007. LTE Rel-13. 2016 IEEE Conference on Standards for
Available online: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4919 Communications and Networking (CSCN), Berlin, Oct.
(Accessed on 20 February 2019) 2016, pp. 1-7.

[19] ITU T-REC-G.9959: Short Range Narrow-Band Digital [29] Crosby, G. V., Vafa, F., 2013. Wireless sensor networks
Radiocommunication Transceivers—PHY, MAC, SAR and LTE-A network convergence. 38th Annual IEEE
and LLC Layer Specifications. Available online: Conference on Local Computer Networks, Sydney,
http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.9959-201501-I NSW, 2013, pp. 731-734.
(Accessed on 20 February 2019). [30] Ghosh, A., Ratasuk, R., Mondal, B., Mangalvedhe, N.,
[20] Gomez, C., Paradells, J., 2010. Wireless home Thomas T., 2010. LTE-Advanced: Next-generation
automation networks: A survey of architectures and wireless broadband technology [Invited Paper]. IEEE
technologies. IEEE Communications Magazine, Volume Wireless Communications, Volume 17, Issue 3, Jun.
48, Issue 6, Jun. 2010, pp 92-101. 2010, pp. 10-22.

[21] Z-Wave Alliance—Home Management. Available [31] Hasan, M., Hossain, E., Niyato, D., 2013. Random
online: https://z-wavealliance.org/home-management/ access for machine-to-machine communication in LTE-
(Accessed on 20 February 2019). Advanced networks: Issues and approaches. IEEE
Communications Magazine, Volume 51, Issue 6, Jun.
[22] Yassein, M.B., Mardini,W., Khalil, A., 2016. Smart 2013, pp. 86-93.
homes automation using Z-wave protocol. 2016
International Conference on Engineering & MIS [32] Augustin, A., Yi, J., Clausen, T., Townsley, W. M.,
(ICEMIS), Agadir, Morocco, Sept. 2016, pp. 1–6. 2016. A Study of LoRa: Long Range & Low Power
Networks for the Internet of Things. Sensors 2016, 16,
[23] IEEE 802.11ah-2016, IEEE Standard for Information 1466.
technology--Telecommunications and information
exchange between systems - Local and metropolitan area [33] Reynders, B., S., Pollin, 2016. Chirp spread spectrum as
networks--Specific requirements - Part 11: Wireless a modulation technique for long range communication.
LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical 2016 Symposium on Communications and Vehicular
Layer (PHY) Specifications Amendment 2: Sub 1 GHz Technologies (SCVT), Mons, Belgium, 2016, pp. 1-5.
License Exempt Operation. IEEE Standard, May 2017. [34] LoRaWAN TM Specification , November 2015.
Availableonline:https://standards.ieee.org/standard/802_ Available online: https://lora-alliance.org/about-lorawan
11ah-2016.html (Accessed on 20 February 2019) (Accessed on 20 February 2019)
[24] Adame, T., Bel, A., Bellalta, B., Barcelo, J. , Oliver, M., [35] Semtech Acquires Wireless Long Range IP Provider
2014. IEEE 802.11AH: the WiFi approach for M2M Cycleo. 7 March 2012. Available online:
communications, IEEE Wireless Communications, https://investors.semtech.com/news-releases/news-
Volume 21, Issue 6, Dec. 2014, pp. 144-152. release-details/semtech-acquires-wireless-longrange-ip-
[25] Khorov, E., Krotov A.,Lyakhov, A., 2015. Modelling provider-cycleo (Accessed on 20 February 2019).
machine type communication in IEEE 802.11ah [36] Sigfox Technology Overview , 2017, Available online:
networks. 2015 IEEE International Conference on https://www.sigfox.com/en/sigfox-iot-technology-
overview (Accessed on 20 February 2019).

IJCATM : www.ijcaonline.org 28