«Carles Gómez Josep Paradells José E. Caballero Edita: Fundación Vodafone España Autores: Carles Gómez Montenegro* Universitat Politècnica de ...»
The 3GPP standardization body has done an important effort in specifying stand-alone network architecture for offering IP-based multimedia services to mobile users; that is to say IP Multimedia Subsystem (IMS) . By means of IMS, the network is aware of the service and as a result controls the service. IMS has been also adopted as a key subsystem in the ETSI TISPAN architecture (where TISPAN stands for “Telecoms and Internet Services and Protocols for Advanced Networks”). Therefore, IMS can be seems as a key piece of convergence of the wireless and the Internet worlds. IMS is an access agnostic technology, hence it is not just for UMTS or GPRS, but will also support WLAN, fixed line, etc. IMS can be optimised by other “All-IP components”52, but IMS does not require the other components of All-IP.
The seamless integration of WSNs into IMS capable networks, like for example 3G mobile communication networks, might enable the deployAll-IP refers to the complete set of technologies to optimise the provision of IP services (IP core and transport networks, IP radio access network and radio interface, IMS).
Chapter 13. Interoperability between wireless sensor networks and other networks ment of new application and services to the users based on getting efficient access to real time contextual information from the sensors. Some integrated architecture solutions based on this idea are proposed in [17, 18].
Another approach considers the Presence architecture (an integral part of IMS) for the integration, focusing on how the information is conveyed from the sensor network to the presence infrastructure (i.e. the inbound interface) .
A third approach proposes an interworking architecture between Session Initiation Protocol (SIP) and ZigBee protocols, and the mapping between the ZigBee binding mechanisms and publish/subscribe/notify mechanisms of SIP  (see Fig. 13.6).
REFERENCES A. Dunkels et al., “Connecting Wireless Sensornets with TCP/IP Networks”, in Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Wired/Wireless Internet Communications (WWIC'04), Frankfurt, Germany, February 2004.
 V. Cerf et al., “Delay-Tolerant Networking Architecture”, RFC 4838, April 2007.
 ConnectPort X Gateways Product Datasheet.
http://www.digi.com/pdf/ds_connectportx.pdf  W. R. Osborn, J.W. Benett, “ZigBee/IP gateway”, WO/2008/027615, March 2008.
 A. Dunkels, J.P. Vasseur, “IP for Smart Objects”, Internet Protocol for Smart Objects (IPSO) Alliance, White Paper #1, September 2008.
 J. Hui, D. Culler, “IP is Dead, Long Live IP for Wireless Sensor Networks”, in Proceedings of the 6th ACM Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys’08), Raleigh, USA, November 2008.
 M. Ho, K. Fall, “Poster: Delay Tolerant Networking for Sensor Networks”, in Proceedings of the First IEEE Conference on Sensor and Ad Hoc Communications and Networks (SECON 2004), Santa Clara, USA, 2004.
 K. Fall, “A Delay-Tolerant Network Architecture for Challenged Internets”, in Proceedings of SIGCOMM’03, Karlsruhe, Germany, August 2003.
 “Z-Wave Converges with TCP/IP to Become the Global Standard for Wireless Home Control”, http://www.newswireless.net, 16 May 2007.
 “Sigma Designs Introduces IP-Wave Single Chip Solution”, http://www.tradingmarkets.com, 27 May 2009.
 ZigBee Alliance, “ZigBee plans further integration of Internet Protocol standards”, April 2009.
 C. Bormann, D. Sturek, Z. Shelby, “6LowApp: Problem Statement for 6LoWPAN and LLN Application Protocols”, draft-bormann-6lowpanlowapp-problem-01, IETF Internet draft, (Work in progress) July 2009.
 N. Kushalnagar, G. Montenegro, C. Schumacher, “IPv6 over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Networks (6LoWPANs): Overview, Assumptions, Problem Statement and Goals”, RFC 4919, August 2007.
 S. Deering, R. Hinden. “Internet protocol, version 6 (ipv6) specification”, RFC 2460, December 1998.
Chapter 13. Interoperability between wireless sensor networks and other networks
 G. Tolle. “A UDP/IP Adaptation of the ZigBee Application Protocol”;
draft-tolle-cap-00, IETF Internet Draft, (Work in progress) October 2008.
 3rd Generation Partnership Project 3GPP, TS 23.228 V8.1.0: IP Multimedia Subsystems (IMS); Stage 2. June 2007.
 A. Gluhak, W. Schott, “A WSN System Architecture to Capture Context Information for beyond 3G Communication Systems”, 3rd Intelligent Sensors, Sensor Networks and Information Processing (ISSNIP) conference, Melbourne, Australia, December 2007.
 D. Das, “Exploring Integration of Sensor Applications with IMS”, International Conference on IP Multimedia Subsystems, Architecture and Applications (IMSAA), Bangalore, India, December 2007.
 M. El Barachi, A. Kadiwal, R. Glitho, F. Khendek, R. Dssouli, “A Presence based Architecture for the Integration of the Sensing Capabilities of Wireless Sensor Networks in the IP Multimedia Subsystem”, Wireless Communications and Networking Conference 2008 (WCNC' 08), Las Vegas, USA April 2008.
 S. Tomic, P. Todorova. “SIP meets ZigBee”, Mobile and Wireless Communications Summit, 2007. 16th IST, Budapest, Hungary, July 2007.
 D. Sturek, “ZigBee IP Stack Overview”, ZigBee Alliance, 2009.
 S. Tomic, P. Todorova. “SIP meets ZigBee”, Mobile and Wireless Communications Summit. 16th IST, 2007.
 S. Krishnamurthy, “TinySIP: Providing Seamless Access to Sensor-based Services”, Mobile and Ubiquitous Systems - Workshops, 2006. 3rd Annual International Conference, pp.1-9, July 2006.
 A. Hornsby, P. Belimpasakis, I. Defee, “XMPP-based wireless sensor network and its integration into the extended home environment”, Consumer Electronics, 2009. ISCE '09. IEEE 13th International Symposium on, pp. 794-797, 2009.
 C. Pastrone, M. A. Spirito, R. Tomasi, F. Rizzo, “Jabber-based management framework for heterogeneous sensor network applications”,
International Journal of Software Engineering and Its Applications, Vol.
2, No. 3, pp. 9 – 24, July, 2008.
 A. Hornsby, E. Bail, “micro-XMPP: Lightweight Implementation for Low Power Operating System Contiki”, SASN '09, The International Workshop on Scalable Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks, Saint Petersburg (Russia), October 2009.
 OpenSpime architecture definition.
http://openspime.org/files/openspime_architecture.pdf  Pachube Web site: http://www.pachube.com/  EEML Web site: http://www.eeml.org/  U. Hunkeler, H. Linh Truong, A. Stanford-Clark, “MQTT-S - A publish– /subscribe protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks”, Communication Systems Software and Middleware and Workshops, 2008. COMSWARE
2008. 3rd International Conference on. Bangalore (India), pp. 791 – 798, Jan. 2008.
 F. J. Molina, J. Barbancho, J. Luque, “Automated Meter Reading and SCADA Application for Wireless Sensor Network”, Ad-Hoc, Mobile, and Wireless Networks, Springer. Vol. 2865. pp. 223 – 234, 2003  B. Xingzhen, M. Xiangzhong, D. Zhaowen, G. Maofa, H. Zhiguo, “Design of Wireless Sensor Network in SCADA system for wind power plant”, Automation and Logistics, 2008. ICAL 2008. IEEE International Conference on, pp. 3023-3027, Sept. 2008.
 C. Amarawardhana, K. S. Dayananada, H. Porawagama, C. Gamage, “Case study of WSN as a replacement for SCADA,’’ Industrial and Information Systems (ICIIS), 2009 International Conference on, pp. 49-54, Dec. 2009.
 http://xmpp.org/extensions/  A. Stanford-Clark, H. Linh Truong, “MQTT For Sensor Networks (MQTTS) Protocol Specification Version 1.1 August 18, 2008. Available at:
Chapter 13. Interoperability between wireless sensor networks and other networks
 P. Saint-Andre, “Streaming XML with Jabber/XMPP”, IEEE Internet Computing, Vol. 9, No. 5, pp. 82-89.
 P. Saint-Andre, “RFC: 3920. Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP): Core”, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3920.txt  R. T. Fielding, R. N. Taylor. “Principled design of the modern Web architecture”. Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Software Engineering (ICSE 2000), Limerick, Ireland, June 2000, pp.
 Z. Shelby, M. Garrison Stuber, D. Sturek, B. Frank, R. Kelsey. “CoAP Feature Analysis”, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-shelby-6lowappcoap-01. IETF Internet Draft (Work in progress) April 2010.
 T. Luckenbach, P. Gober, S. Arbanowski, A. Kotsopoulos, K. Kim. “Tinyrest
- a protocol for integrating sensor networks into the Internet”, Stockholm, Sweden, 2005.
 C. Pautasso, O. Zimmermann, F. Leymann, “RESTful Web services vs.
"big" Web services: making the right architectural decision”, in proceedings of the 17th international conference on World Wide Web. (WWW '08) ACM, 2008.
 D. Guinard, V. Trifa, T. Pham, and O. Liechti, “Towards Physical Mashups in the Web of Things,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Networked Sensing Systems (INSS 2009), 2009.
 Y. Kim, Y.-S. Jeong, J.-H. Hwang, K.-J. Lee, R. S. Tolentino, S.-H. Lee, G.-C.
Park, "A Design and Implementation of USN-Based Mobile Web Services Framework," Future Generation Communication and Networking, Second International Conference on Future Generation Communication and Networking, pp. 19-23, 2008.
 S. Duquennoy, G. Grimaud, J.-J. Vandewalle, “The Web of Things: interconnecting devices with high usability and performance,” in 6th International Conference on Embedded Software and Systems (ICESS’09), Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China, May 2009.
Energy consumption and harvesting
Chapter 14. Energy consumption and harvesting
14. Energy consumption and harvesting At present, a key aspect for a full deployment of a WSN is power consumption and the corresponding power supply. Traditional solutions based on connectivity to the power supply network or the usage of batteries are feasible for some limited set of possible usages. For a wide acceptance of WSNs, the power supply lifetime should be identical to the sensor node lifetime. Once a sensor node is deployed it should work unattended, while battery replacement may not be practical or feasible. Considering the energy constraint as a key performance parameter results in a new set of crosslayer design considerations different to those found in traditional networks.
Significant efforts have been made to reduce energy consumption by redesigning the communication paradigms and by improving the efficiency of circuits. The technology trend in this area is based in reducing the voltage, making circuits able to work at different clock frequencies and using analogue circuits to perform some parts of the radio processing. However, the use of batteries as the only source of energy may not be sufficient. There are several cases where alternative sources of energy can be used. The most common one is solar energy, but other sources such as movement, pressure or even differences of temperature can be used to provide energy for feeding very low power sensors.
This chapter is devoted to energy consumption and harvesting or scavenging for WSNs. Section 14.1 presents an energy consumption model for WSNs, which includes a description of the energy consumed by data communication and data processing. Section 14.2 presents the range of power sources available for sensor networks.
14.1. Energy consumption model Power consumption in a sensor network can be divided into three domains: communication, data processing and sensing. This section focuses on the first two domains, since sensing depends greatly on the particular sensing application and platform.
14.1.1. Power consumption for data communication Communication is the dominant factor for energy consumption in WSNs.
A model that describes power consumption for communication is shown next . The parameters in the left column of Table 14.1 should be defined in accordance with the descriptions in the right column of the same table.
An expression for the power consumption due to data communications
of a sensor is as follows :
Pc = NT • (Pte • (Ton + Tst ) + Po • Ton) + NR • (Pre • ( Ron + Rst )) (8)
where Ton is obtained as the ratio of the length of the data unit transmitted (L) and the data rate at which the data is transmitted (R):
Ton = L / R (9) Note that the power consumed depends linearly on the frequency of transmitter switch on (NT) and receiver switch on (NR). The values of these parameters actually depend on MAC and application layers.
Furthermore, start-up times are necessary to ramp up phase locked loops or voltage controlled oscillators. During start-up time, no data transmission or reception is possible. The start-up time dominates power consumption when data units are short. To minimize power consumption, the MAC protocol used must take the start-up times into account, maintaining the transceiver in a sleep mode as long as possible, but also taking into consideration that turning the transceiver on and off also consumes energy to prepare it for transmission or reception.
Finally, Pre is typically greater than Pte since more circuitry is required to receive a signal. Table 14.2 shows details on the current consumption of a range of WSN chips on the market . Note that in most cases, reception current consumption is equal to or greater than that of transmission53. The power consumed when transmitting depends significantly on the transmission power. An IEEE 802.15.4 radio interface consumes 25 mA at 3.3 V for a transmitted power of 1 mW, and increases up to 150 mA for transmitted power up to 100 mW. On the other hand, typical consumption of idle states is in the order of microAmperes .
Note that the transmission current depends on the transmission power used.
The second term of equation (10) indicates the power loss due to leakage currents between power and ground .