1

COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF

IoT ARCHITECTURES

Authors:

Ravi Teja Guthikonda

Sai Srikar Chitta

Shraddha Tekawade

Tripti Attavar

Advisor: Dr. Lijun Chen

TLEN 5710 Capstone

April 25, 2014

2 Abstract:

The Internet had been considered as a form of human-to-human communication. However, due

to recent developments in technology, intelligence is embedded in devices. These “smart” devices have

the ability to interact with humans and other smart devices, as well, which led to the development of

“Internet of Things” (IoT). This project explores the impacts of deployment of IoT on network

architecture: how will IoT change the Internet architecture and what would be the right architecture for

IoT. It focuses on a comparative analysis of the Internet architecture and a few application specific IoT

architectures that are currently proposed, based on a set of design goals and design principles. Based on

the results of a comparative study, we propose a new IoT architecture with elements borrowed from the

existing architectures and proposals, formulate a timeline for its deployment, and briefly discuss its

policy implications.

3

Table of Contents:

I. Introduction

i. Statement of Problem 4

ii. Research Question 4

II. Literature Review 5

III. Research Methodology 8

IV. Research Results 8

V. Discussion of Results 10

VI. Conclusion and Future Research 22

VII. References 24

4

I. Introduction:

i. Statement of the problem:

Internet of Things (IoT) will consist of billions of devices in the near future. There have

been predictions that, by the year 2020, about 8 billion devices will have connectivity to the

Internet. The deployment of this technology will need some changes to the current network

infrastructure, protocols, and services. Creation of compound applications that are part of

different industries can be facilitated using IoT. These applications will be part of everyday life

and the impact to our society is significant. The expectations for revenue opportunities are

around $2.7 trillion. Companies such as Cisco, Microsoft, Oracle are already investing heavily in

IoT. Many issues such as no standardized architecture, privacy and safety concerns, and

interoperability between vendors plague IoT. Our research aims to bridge the gap in several

architectures and propose a multi-industry and multi-vendor architecture that will be ubiquitous.

An ideal architecture makes the usage of IoT more desirable and easier to deploy [16].

ii. Research Questions:

• What are the defining features of IoT and how is it different from the current Internet?

The purpose is to identify the significant differences between the current Internet and IoT, in

particular, what the defining features of IoT are in terms of physical layer technologies and

applications, as well as the associated performance requirements in communications.

• What are the design goals for the IoT architecture and the design principles that allow the

IoT to achieve these goals?

5 Architecture is about the protocol stack that impedance matches the physical layer

technologies and the applications. Guided by this, the purpose is to identify a set of design goals

for the IoT architecture and the design principles that allow the system to achieve these goals.

• What are the different architectures of IoT currently being proposed/used, focusing on a

few use cases?

The purpose is to carry out a comparative analysis of the existing proposals for IoT

architecture and evaluate them according to the design goals and principles identified in the

above.

• What will be a good architecture, based on the existing proposals/Internet, as well as our

own recommendation?

Proposing or recommending architecture that can be standardized for universal use. A

timeline for adopting/deploying the proposed architecture and the associated cost, as well as its

impact on policy.

II. Literature Review

Internet of things is a term coined by Kevin Ashton in one of his presentations [13]. The term

describes a technology of the future based on the Internet and involves sharing of information [13]. IoT

is revolution in the world of technology and it is the next big thing in the world of computing and

communication. IoT allows the communication between all the things we see around us apart from the

human-machine interaction that already exists. Applications of IoT range from various fields from the

obvious IT to the surprising, saving energy using smart grids [11].

IoT can be considered as an extension of traditional wireless sensor networks (WSN) that makes

the object-to-object communication possible by use of technology called radio frequency identification

(RFID). RFID enables the object to identify other objects. RFID has long been used as a replacement to

6 barcode. The objects use this technology to identify other objects and so that they can connect to them.

This technology also detects objects in real time and provides important information such as location

and status [1]. IoT is enabled by a robust RFID system. IoT also uses sensors to link the physical and

information worlds) [4]. The sensors are used to collect data about the surroundings this data can be

analyzed according to different circumstances and factors to bridge the gap [11]. IoT also makes the use

of nanotechnology and miniaturization to place intelligence in various devices. These devices with

intelligence are called smart devices and have an important place in the architecture of IoT. These

devices can configure themselves and take a decision on their own. After which real object-to-object

communication will be accomplished [11].

The architecture of Internet was developed in late 70’s to use that architecture for IoT, which has

billions of devices sharing data with each other, will not be practical. The amount of data produced by

IoT cannot be handled by the current Internet architecture The new architecture of IoT should address

several issues such as reliability, quality of service (QoS), security, and interoperability. The new

architecture also needs to be universal i.e. it must be adopted by everyone so that it can be used for any

application. The architecture must also be flexible so that it can be modified to change according to the

future needs [11].

The fact that Internet of Things is the inevitable future of the Internet has led to extensive

research in trying to solve or minimize the challenges that could hinder its deployment. A number of

new network architectures have been proposed to manage the communication between the IP-speaking

devices [8]. Khan et.al. [6] proposed the generic architecture, existing development trends, and possible

applications of IoT. As the number of devices gets connected to the Internet, proposed IoT architecture

should address many concerns such as scalability, reliability, and QoS [6]. Miao Wu et.al. [13]has

explained the current 3-layer architecture of IoTand why is not enough, they also proposed a new 5-

7 layer architecture to perceive its essence. Miao Wu et.al.[13]explained the need for new IoT

architecture, which includes features of both Internet and Communications Network.

Increased traffic volume with deployment of IoT poses a serious threat to the security of IoT.

Multimedia applications are one among the many applications, which lead to increased traffic volume.

Liang Zhou, and Han-Chieh[9] proposed a Framework for Security architecture. Liang Zhou, and Han-

Chieh[9] also explained the study of different multimedia traffic in the interest of IoT. [16].Rolf H.

Weber [17] discussed the security challenges for architecture of IoT. Some of the concerns for security

in IoT include resilience to attacks, data authentication, and access control.

IoT generates a massive amount of data from various sensors. This data will be used to analyze

and provide the needed solutions. The amount of data generated by IoT provides an opportunity for data

storage and cloud computing companies like EMC, Microsoft, etc. Microsoft is investing heavily in IoT

for enterprises. Microsoft has created a cross-platform cloud based IoT managing service to enterprise

customers..This service also includes analytics part of the data. The cloud and data management services

of IoT are few of the glaring issues that can be addressed with an appropriate architecture [14].

The architecture is like the backbone of IoT if it is not robust and flexible, deploying IoT will

take more time than required. Thus, our research is prominent as it makes IoT easier to deploy.

Although a number of architectures are present, it is important that any architecture be accepted

universally addressing the several issues faced by IoT. Standardization has many benefits such as easy

deployment, manageability, troubleshooting, etc. Our research includes solutions to various issues such

as interoperability, performance and security issues. Security has also been one of the concerns of IoT.

By improving security within the architecture, IoT would be installed smoothly without any skepticism.

8 III. Research Methodology:

During this project, we planned to carry out detailed study of the available literature and current

research in order to propose a new architecture for IoT. We began by studying the differences between

the traditional Internet and the IoT. We identified the distinguishing features of IoT. After identifying

these features we defined the design requirements of IoT and identified a set of principles that will aid in

fulfilling these design requirements.

After identifying the design principles we studied various use cases for IoT applications and

determined the four most popular ones to use in our comparative analysis. We then studied the most

appropriate architecture used in these cases based on the set of design principles, which we identified. A

detailed study of these use cases helped us in identifying the advantages and the shortcomings of the

various architectures. After conducting a detailed comparative study of these architectures and the

current research in the industry, we have tried to propose a modular architecture for IoT that will

facilitate interoperability between various vendors and standards. The suggestions in this architecture

were confined to the set of design principles, which we identified.

IV. Research Results:

What’s special about IoT and how is it different from the current Internet?

The Internet now is no longer used as a communication between people using computers instead

it will be used in IoT to enable the communication between various devices [2]. The difference in the

number of devices connected now and when IoT is in use will be colossal. 8 billion devices are expected

to be connected by 2020 and the current Internet may not be able to handle it. IoT will be using the

existing infrastructure as part of its connectivity. Scalability is a significant difference between the two

but the current Internet will be able to handle them by a few protocol changes like using IPv6 instead of

IPv4. The other difference is the devices used in IoT will have intelligence embedded in them and may

9 not use the same protocols used now. The access technologies used are in IoT will be different from the

access technologies used in the current Internet. Short-range wireless technologies that consume low

power are popular with IoT. The applications in IoT will be more interactive, user friendly and require

less intervention from the user [2].

What are the design goals and the design principles that enable to achieve these goals?

The following are the design goals that we have identified for an ideal IoT architecture.

1. Manageability

Manageability describes the existence of intelligence in the architecture. The common types of

manageability include centralized and distributed based control.

2. Security and Privacy

Security and privacy deal with the ability of how immune the architecture would be to outside attacks. It

deals with various issues such as authentication, encryption, etc.

3. Mobility

Mobility should be considered in the architectures when the end nodes move from one place to another.

4. Cost-effectiveness

Cost-effectiveness determines the affordability of the architecture.

5. Efficiency

Efficiency is described in terms of power management of the different devices connected to the

architecture.

6. Quality of Service (QoS)

QoS is a performance management technique for the prioritization of different data traffic from devices.

10 The following are the design principles that we have identified for an ideal IoT architecture.

A layering approach in which one-layer implements the service offered by the layer below and provides

services to the layer above is identified.

The existence of intelligence in the network is identified. This can be achieved either by making the core

or the end-devices intelligent.

What are the different architectures of Internet of things currently being proposed/used, focusing

on a few use cases?

We have identified the popular use cases from Healthcare, Automotive, Home automation, and

Electrical Power industries. The use cases are remote healthcare monitoring, connected cars, smart home

and smart grids. We have also identified the architecture that best fits the each use case according to the

design goals. We determined that remote healthcare has a best fit with community health service

architecture based IoT. IBM’s smart grid architecture is best suited for the smart grids use case.

“Stratecast” architecture proposed by IBM is befitting the needs of smart home application. The ITS

connected vehicle's architecture is suitable for connected cars.

V. Discussion of Results:

Remote Healthcare:

One of the motives behind using IoT in healthcare industry is to provide remote health care. By

using IoT, doctors can monitor the health of patients remotely and in real-time to provide timely

assistance whenever required [18].

We found “A Community Health Service Architecture Based on the Internet of Things on

Health-Care ” by Wu-Zhao, Liu Lei-Hong, Huang Yue-shan and Wu Xiao-ming to be a strong

according our design goals. The community health service technical architecture consists of three layers

11 as shown. Information perception layer, network transmission layer, and application layer constitute the

architecture. Perception layer includes different types of sensors such as wearable sensors to detect the

physical condition of the various organs and special sensors to detect the position of the user [18].

Figure 1. A Community Health Service Architecture Based on the Internet of Things on

Health-Care [18].

Information collected from these sensors is sent to the wireless receiver and from there is

transferred to the computer. From the PC data is transferred to remote health care monitoring center via

the Internet. Application service layer combines the technology of IoT and medical health care center

12 resulting in remote health service. Remote monitoring health care service improves cost savings and

prevents overcrowding of hospital beds [18].

The general architecture for community health service as shown. Basic blocks of the architecture

include family client and community health care center. The physiological conditions of the patients are

collected by the wireless health sensors and then transmitted to the health care center. The health care

center doctors can analyze, test the collected data and provide medical service through

text/email/video/voice [18].

Figure 2. Health Care architecture [18].

The family client includes medical sensors, Zigbee wireless network, and Home Computer.

Wireless sensors monitor physiological, environment parameters of the patients continuously and then

transmit the information to the base stations/monitoring stations through Zigbee wireless network. Data

is transferred from the base station to the computer and data is transferred to the health care center via

Internet. Community Health Care center consists of doctors, pc machines database servers, and medical

works. Database servers consist of personal information, monitoring data and doctor’s information [18].

The patients can use the database servers to query the doctor information and choose the right

doctor for diagnosis. The patients can also input their daily life information, health reports, and disease

records into the database making it easy for the doctors to provide diagnosis. Doctors can also query for

13 patient’s records to check their health status. Apart from all these the users can consult doctor’s real time

through voice, video, and text [18].

The problem with this architecture is that there is no support for privacy and security of user

data, QoS support for time sensitive or critical, data and mobility of the user. All these parameters are

important for the timely and accurate response in case of emergencies.

Smart Grids:

The Smart Grid is termed as the ‘the central nerve system’ of the power system. Smart Grids can

improve energy efficiency, reduce the environmental impact, improve the safety and reliability of

electricity supply, and thus, reduce the electricity transmission of grid [8].

Traditional users such as residential users, commercial and industrial users along with electric

vehicle charging systems, are using the smart grids for their applications. Smart grids with Internet of

Things (IoT) act as an upgrade to the existing electrical grids. The IoT architecture must include the four

major modules of transmission, distribution, smart substations and the efficient usage of electricity for

the smart grids [10].

General smart grid architecture should have characteristics such as centralized management, very

high privacy and security, high reliability, low latency, high scalability. The physical layer technologies

used in smart grids include Wi-Fi, Zigbee, RFID, etc. [10].

The basic and the most common network model for Smart Grid application is a three-layer

network architecture proposed by the authors Ling Zheng, Shuangbao Chen, Shuyue Xiang,

YanxiangHu from the North China Electric Power University. The architecture is divided into the

perceived extension layer, network layer and the application layer. This approach of architecture uses a

centralized control of the smart grids through the use of Information and Communication

Technology(ICT) platform [10].

14

Figure 3. Three layer architecture for Smart Grids [10].

The perception extension layer is similar to the physical layer of the OSI model in network

architecture. This layer provides all the meteorological environment information, the device status

information, and information related to the transmission, substation, distribution and usage of electricity.

It is composed of sensors working on Wi-Fi, Zigbee; smart terminals, RFID tags and other input and

output entities that are deployed in the actual monitoring environment. These sensing elements collect

the device status information, line status information, weather environmental information and

distribution of electricity-integrated information of the processes of electricity transmission, substation

and distribution [10].

The network layer consists of wireless sensor networks, gateway nodes, access networks and

core networks. The wireless sensor networks use the sensing elements in the perception extension layer

to collect information to deliver it to the gateway node. The gateway node transmits the collected data to

the access network, which is finally transmitted into the power communication core network. Access

15 networks include power fiber-optic access networks and broadband wireless access networks. The core

side of the network contains Ethernet, ADSL, 3G, xPON, etc. [10].

The application layer is built to satisfy the business needs of smart grid. This layer builds a

variety of power application platforms and serves as a management and control mechanism to the large

amounts of data received from the sensing networks [10].

This architecture also considers the existing electrical power communication network into

consideration for interoperability. Smart grids with this architecture have better interaction and

information processing capabilities. Security can be incorporated in it by using some of the existing

authentication and encryption techniques. Major companies such as Intel are heavily investing and

working with Austin-based energy consortium Pecan Street Inc. to test the future of energy with smart

grids and IoT [10].

The main shortcomings of this architecture are lack of security mechanisms and support for QoS.

Connected/Smart Home:

Smart homes consist of a number of day-to-day devices with embedded intelligence that can

communicate with other similar smart devices. There are a number of companies that are proposing their

own architectures for connecting these smart devices. The main problem with these current architectures

is interoperability between devices manufactured by different vendors. These architectures are more or

less similar in many aspects [15].

“Stratecast” is one such architecture proposed by IBM. What makes this architecture unique is

that it addresses the problem of integration and delivery of different services along with standardizing

the communication between various devices. This architecture uses the principle of integrating different

services in the cloud as against the traditional approach of integrating them at the edge device on the

user's network such as a wireless gateway. IBM refers this functionality as “home in the cloud” [15].

16 This architecture uses a common service platform to integrate various services accessed by the

users and to facilitate seamless communication between smart devices. Rather than having all the

devices try to communicate with each other directly, these devices can communicate with a single point/

platform that will take care of the communication between various devices and services. This platform

will accommodate all types of devices irrespective of the vendor. Instead of having the devices connect

to the cloud directly, a better approach is to have these devices communicate to a local device such as a

local router/gateway that will act a mediator between the end devices and the cloud. This gateway can be

managed and controlled from the cloud. It will just act a point of integration between the end devices

and the cloud [15].

The following diagram shows the common service integration platform:

Figure 4. IBM “Stratecast” architecture for Smart Home [15].

Using this architecture, the service providers deliver various services to the communication

service providers (CSP) who will then integrate these different services and deliver them to the end users

17 according to the user requirements. This architecture design will help in simplifying the effort on the

user side to a great extent [15].

IBM is working with CSPs such as Verizon and device vendors such as Philips to try and

implement this architecture. This architecture focuses on the needs of both machine to machine (M2M)

services and Over the Top (OTT) services such as online video streaming. Since the user can access all

these types of services without any additional efforts on the user side, it provides a perfect platform for

seamless integration of different technologies and standards. This is what the end user ultimately

demands [15].

This architecture takes care of most of the design goals except for the support for QoS, user data

privacy, and security requirements.

Connected Cars:

Figure 5. ITS architecture for connected cars [5].

18 Connected car is an application of Internet of things that are gaining vast popularity rapidly. As

the name suggests every car is connected to another and to the Internet through various wireless

technologies such as wireless local area networks (WLAN), Long term evolution (LTE), etc. There are

various sensors inside the car that provide data about the functionality of the car, communicate with

other cars and a centralized server, etc. The data can be used for road safety, improving traffic

efficiency, other trivial issues such as navigating, finding open parking spots, video content delivery, etc

[5].

There are various architectures proposed for this popular application. Companies like Cisco,

Oracle, Broadcom, and Volkswagen have proposed various architectures but architecture called

intelligent transport system (ITS) is more feasible universally as it is not vendor specific, it is more

functional as it supports more applications. The figure of the architecture is shown. It is based on the

OSI protocol stack. The access layer is concerned with both the physical and data link layers. The short-

range communication can use 802.11 technologies more specifically wireless access in a vehicular

environment and dedicated short-range communications. For long-range communication existing

infrastructure such as 3G, LTE and WiMAX can be used. The next layer combines both the networking

and transport layer of OSI model. IPv6 is used in the network layer for scalability, higher network

efficiency, and in built security features. The transport layer consists of either TCP or UDP [5].

Each networking protocol can have its own dedicated existing transport protocol such as TCP,

UDP or ITSC transport protocols. IPv6 over geonetworking can be used for more efficiency. It uses the

IPv6’s multicast according to the geographical region that makes the architecture more efficient as it

does not use the regular IP metrics such as hop, cost, etc. The facilities layer consists of application and

presentation support. The facilities layer also supports of the maintenance of various applications.

Service messages and requesting for repetition messages are also part of the facilities. The management

layer is a cross functional that supports all other layers. It has various uses as regulatory management,

19 application management, and station management. The security layer is also a cross functional layer

that is used for authentication, authorization, firewall, intrusion management, etc [5].

The ITSC architecture consists of a station that every vehicle can connect and exchange data. It

also consists of handheld subsystem, vehicle subsystem, a central hub and roadside subsystem. This

architecture is developed in collaboration between ITS Europe, ITS America and ITS Japan making the

ITS architecture universal without any interoperability issues [5].

The concerns about security and network management are taken care by cross-functional security

and management layers. However, this application has strict constraints on the timely delivery of data

irrespective of dynamic network conditions. This is one design goal that needs to be better addressed.

Proposed Architecture:

After studying the various IoT use cases and their architectures it is safe to say that IoT and the

traditional Internet architectures are similar in many aspects. So we do not need to propose an entirely

new architecture, but only need to suggest some improvements in the existing layered architecture to

address the needs of IoT applications.

•  Provudes an API or understandable interface to the user User Interface

•  Converts the user defined network parameters and provides them to transport layer

Performance Management

•  TCP, UDP, QoS Transport

•  Interpretation of different data, data forwarding, security Networking

•  Data integrity, efficient point to point connection, interference management, channel managemnt

Enhanced Link Layer

•  Connection of devices, collection of data from sensors, and authentication. Device Management

20 Figure 6. Enhanced Architecture for IoT applications.

The first module is the device management module. It performs various functions such as

connection of devices, collection of information from sensors, and the authentication and authorization

of different devices. We strongly suggest that all the devices support IPv6 with geonetworking for more

efficient addressing and security. The devices should also support short-range wireless technology such

as Zigbee, Wi-Fi and long-range communication such as Long Term Evolution (LTE).

The second module is the enhanced link layer. This layer carries out all the functions of the

traditional data link layer. This layer needs to address the issues related to reliability of point-to-points

links with greater detail for IoT applications. It also needs to implement a stronger solution for

interference avoidance and management. Efficient channel access mechanisms need to be implemented

that will prioritize devices in order of the critical data that they transmit.

The third module is the Network module. It performs the functions related to internetwork

communication. This module implements a translation between data formats of different vendors and

protocols. It also implements security practices such as data encryption and data filtering. It also

supports adaptive routing in accordance with the available network resources. This module executes

adaptive routing using software defined networking (SDN) [7].

The fourth module is the transport module. Similar to the traditional transport layer this layer

supports TCP or UDP for different applications. It also has support for Integrated Services and

Differentiated services. However, for many IoT applications Differentiated Services may be

implemented for certain applications or certain devices within an application whereas some applications

or devices may require Integrated Services. There are certain applications that may require both the

applications. Thus a new hybrid model that will support both integrated as well as differentiated services

21 for the same application is required. This module implements appropriate QoS policies to fulfill the

desired network performance restrictions such as latency, jitter, throughput, etc.

The fifth module is the performance management module. It acts as an interpreter between the

user-interface module and the transport module. The primary function of this module is to convert the

user defined network performance parameters to appropriate QoS policies. It relays these policies to the

transport layer for implementation. This module also monitors the network performance to determine the

best QoS policies for a particular application. If the network conditions are not favorable to support the

minimum performance requirements this layer informs and negotiates with the user. Implementation of

this module will also require capabilities similar to SDN [7].

The sixth and final module is the user-interface module. It acts a mediator between the user

application and lower modules. It provides performance parameters to the lower module and presents

the data to the user in an understandable format.

The distinguishing features of this architecture are flexibility using modular approach and also

efficient network performance management using SDN.

Policy Considerations for IoT: -

Large-scale deployment of IoT will require certain regulatory changes. First, policies will be

required to regulate the spectrum sharing between existing IoT devices. Second, the limits need to be

defined to protect the devices from interference with each other. Third, if reallocation of the existing

spectrum or new spectrum range allocation is needed to accommodate the large number of devices in

IoT.

Sub 1Ghz channels are being expanded in the new IEEE 802.15.4 standard to be utilized by key

technologies of IoT such as ZigBee, 6LoWPAN, etc. Wireless controlled devices and home automation

applications use the 2.4Ghz band that come under 802.15.4 standard. Devices from Wi-Fi routers to

22 microwave ovens also use the 2.4Ghz spectrum overcrowding the spectrum completely. The 802.15.4

standard evolved in 2003 comes with 16 channels in the 2.4Ghz band termed as ISM (Industrial,

Scientific, and Medical) band. The number of Sub 1Ghz channels was then increased to 3 in Europe and

30 in North America. The latest version of the 802.15.4 standard provides support for countries such as

China and Japan in the new Sub 1Ghz bands. These include the ranges of 779-787MHz for China and

915-930MHz for Japan that provide reliable and higher throughputs inside buildings and homes [12].

VI. Conclusions and future research:

In conclusion, it is safe for that IoT is the inevitable future of the Internet. IoT connects billions

of devices and enables machine-to-machine communication. It can transform daily life with everyday

objects connected to each other and the Internet. We have identified the design principles for an ideal

architecture from the shortcomings of other architectures. Various issues such as interoperability,

performance and security issues currently plague IoT. Our research tries to provide solutions to all these

issues by a flexible semi-flat architecture. Comparative analysis of the proposed architectures is the

basis of our architecture. Our architecture is based around the design principles that were identified

earlier. We also address certain policy issues related to IoT and suggest certain steps for cost analysis of

IoT deployment.

Despite providing substantial potential, the business, technology and policy challenges need to

be addressed. The business challenges need to be addressed by including the costs of implementing IoT.

It should also include the cost analysis of the smart devices, technologies implemented etc. The policy

foundations should be created so that the spectrum can be shared without any harmful interference and

acquire further spectrum for IoT. A collaborative effort from different industries such as Internet service

providers, device vendors, software providers, and cloud providers is required for efficient

implementation of IoT. The future research should focus on standardized protocol stack and networking

23 technologies used for a seamless flow of data between different devices. Streamlined data analytics for

the massive amounts of data generated by IoT must also be an area of emphasis.

24 VII. References:

[1] Castellani, A.P.; Bui, N.; Casari, P.; Rossi, M.; Shelby, Z.; Zorzi, M., "Architecture and protocols for

the Internet of Things: A case study," Pervasive Computing and Communications Workshops

(PERCOM Workshops), 2010 8th IEEE International Conference, pp.678-683, March 29 2010-April 2

2010

doi: 10.1109/PERCOMW.2010.5470520

[2] Daniel Castro, Jordan Misra, "the internet of things,"Internet: http://www2.datainnovation.org/2013-

internet-of-things.pdf, November 2013 [Apr. 25, 2014]

[3] Dieter Uckelmann, Mark Harrison, Florian Michahelles (Ed.), "Integrated Billing Solutions in the

Internet of Things" in Architecting the Internet of Things, Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag, May

2011, pp.231-236

[4] HuanshengNing; Ziou Wang, "Future Internet of Things Architecture: Like Mankind Neural System

or Social Organization Framework?," Communications Letters, IEEE, vol.15, no.4, pp.461-463, April

2011

doi: 10.1109/LCOMM.2011.022411.110120

[5] "Intelligent Transport Systems (ITS); Communications Architecture." Retrieved March 2014,

Internet:

http://www.etsi.org/deliver/etsi_en/302600_302699/302665/01.01.01_60/en_302665v010101p.pdf

[6] Khan, R.; Khan, S.U.; Zaheer, R.; Khan, S., "Future Internet: The Internet of Things Architecture,

Possible Applications and Key Challenges," Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), 2012 10th

International Conference, pp.257-260, 17-19 Dec. 2012

25 doi: 10.1109/FIT.2012.53

[7] KwangtaeJeong; Jinwook Kim; Young-Tak Kim, "QoS-aware Network Operating System for

software defined networking with Generalized OpenFlows," Network Operations and Management

Symposium (NOMS), 2012 IEEE, pp.1167-1174, 16-20 April 2012

doi: 10.1109/NOMS.2012.6212044

[8] Li Li; Hu Xiaoguang; Chen Ke; He Ketai, "The applications of WiFi-based Wireless Sensor

Network in Internet of Things and Smart Grid," Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), 2011

6th IEEE Conference, pp.789-793, 21-23 June 2011

doi: 10.1109/ICIEA.2011.5975693

[9] Liang Zhou; Han-Chieh Chao, "Multimedia traffic security architecture for the internet of

things," Network, IEEE, vol.25, no.3, pp.35-40, May-June 2011

doi: 10.1109/MNET.2011.5772059

[10] Ling Zheng; Shuangbao Chen; Shuyue Xiang; Yanxiang Hu, "Research of Architecture and

Application of Internet of Things for Smart Grid," Computer Science & Service System (CSSS), 2012

International Conference, pp.938-941, 11-13 Aug. 2012

doi: 10.1109/CSSS.2012.238

26 [11]Lu Tan; Neng Wang, "Future internet: The Internet of Things," Advanced Computer Theory and

Engineering (ICACTE), 2010 3rd International Conference, vol.5, pp.V5-376,V5-380, 20-22 Aug. 2010

doi: 10.1109/ICACTE.2010.5579543

[12] Magnus Pedersen, "Utilizing the sub-1GHz spectrum for the Internet of Things," Internet:

http://www.embedded.com/design/real-world-applications/4415110/1/Utilizing-the-sub-1GHz-

spectrum-for-the-Internet-of-Things, May 25, 2013 [Apr. 25, 2014]

[13] Miao Wu; Ting-Jie Lu; Fei-Yang Ling; Jing Sun; Hui-Ying Du, "Research on the architecture of

Internet of Things," Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering (ICACTE), 2010 3rd International

Conference, vol.5, pp.V5-484,V5-487, 20-22 Aug. 2010

doi: 10.1109/ICACTE.2010.5579493

[14] Michael Endler, "Microsoft Azure Intelligent Systems: 4 Facts," Internet:

http://www.informationweek.com/big-data/software-platforms/microsoft-azure-intelligent-systems-4-

facts/d/d-id/1204521, [Apr. 25, 2014]

[15] Mike Jude, "IBM: Working Towards a Smarter Connected Home". Retrieved March 2014 Internet:

http://docs.caba.org/documents/IBM-Smart-Cloud-Home-SPIE2012.pdf

[16] "What Exactly Is The "Internet of Things"?" Internet: http://postscapes.com/what-exactly-is-the-

internet-of-things-infographic, [Apr. 25, 2014]

27 [17] Rolf H. Weber, "Internet of Things – New security and privacy challenges," Computer Law &

Security Review, vol. 26, no. 1, pp.23-30, January 2010,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2009.11.008.

[18] Wu-Zhao, Liu Lei-hong , Huang Yue-shan and Wu Xiao-ming, “A Community Health Service

Architecture Based on the Internet of Things on Health-Care,” World Congress on Medical Physics and

Biomedical Engineering, vol 39, pp.1317-1320