Jay Parikh 1 , Naren Tada 2 , and Dr. Tejas Patalia 31M.Tech student, Department of Computer Engineering, V.V.P Engineering College, GujaratTechnological University, Gujarat, [email protected] Professor, Department of Computer Engineering, V.V.P Engineering College, GujaratTechnological University, Gujarat, [email protected] of Department, Department of Computer Engineering, V.V.P Engineering College, GujaratTechnological University, Gujarat, [email protected]?Abstract— Present Vision of IoT is to utilize theobjects in a smart manner by connecting them throughthe network. The future vision of the smart city anddigital urbanization has come true through thistrending networking technology. It uses the number ofmonitoring or sensing devices having low powerconsumption. Moreover, the network created by themhaving the ‘lossy’ characteristics in terms of link anddata-packets, for this type of network RPL has beenintroduced. RPL is designed to be a simple and inter-operable networking protocol for resource-constraineddevices in industrial, home, and urban environments,intended to support the vision of the Internet of Things(IoT) with thousands of devices interconnected throughmulti-hop mesh networks. Although, RPL having somechallenging issues i.e. functional and working related.One of them is multicast Reliability issues that ariseduring the up-down routing (forward routing). In thispaper, we present the literature related to work thathas been done to overcome reliability issue of themulticast functionality of RPL. Further, we gave morefocus on Existing approaches that having thedisadvantages like time delay and transmissionoverhead. Furthermore, our objective is at the enddetermine the approach that gives efficient reliability tothe multicast functionality of RPL and makes the wholeLLN reliable.Keywords— RPL, IPv6 Routing Protocol, Internet ofThings (IoT), Low Power and Lossy Network (LLN).I. I NTRODUCTIONTechnology that makes daily working fast with fewerefforts. Although the evolution of technology also madethings to do the operations with the semi-automatic modethat only need the manual operative system andmaintenance after a long time of use. Wireless SensorNetwork (WSN) is a propelled innovation which comprisesan arrangement of sensor hubs. These sensors are in chargeof detecting and gathering information frame condition inwhich they sent. This data is additionally transmitted to thebase station (BS) by means of the steering convention.Vitality dispersal is a noteworthy concern whileinformation transmission is finished. Different directingconventions are utilized to decrease vitality utilization inWSN. Various leveled routing protocol is considered tolessen vitality utilization. A technological approach thatmakes the things of everyday usage automatic operativethat usually having the manual operation to get the workdone. A technology that changes the perspective and visionwith its advantages and ease of usage. In that category ofprotocol, one of them is LEACH 1. For this protocolmany types of research done on it and derived its cons,working on them and having their own approach toLEACH protocol. MMR-LEACH 2 and E-LEACH 3works on the issue of cluster head selection and loadbalancing. Through this, they can increase the lifetime ofthe network. Despite WSN, Revolutionary technology hasbeen coming to change the scenario of technology throughthe conceptual level. That technology is the Internet ofThings (IoT). The establishment is easy, Implementationcost Low, Maintenance less than old technology andoutcome is more effective these matter a lot in thetechnological world and also all these features given byIoT. IoT brings the whole world to the top of the screenand we can use it with the tip of the finger. It works on theconcept of the wireless sensor network. In general, IoT,Network having the entities as nodes and all the nodeshaving in some small as well as same network. For largescale interface systems nodes having their integratednetwork structure that manages the operations. Nodes aremade up of its machine elements, power supply or batteryand sensors. We can say that Sensors are the heart of IoT.The network that made up with this type of node is Lowpower and Lossy (LLN) in nature. Generally, wirelesssensors network having the protocols for its characteristicse.g. Integrity, Security etc. and its operations e.g. routing.But LLN not having same characteristics so that predefineprotocols are not efficient for this kind of Network.A. RPLInternet Engineering Task Force (IETF) and Routingover Low power and Lossy Network (ROLL) defined thecharacteristics of this type of network that nodes areconstrained node that having the low power of processing,storage, and battery. Also, it is the Lossy in terms of thedata packet and link loss. Routing particular in this type ofthe constrained and large-scale network is a challenge forthat. Because other protocols that related to routing are noteffective or operative as much as we required IETF andROLL working group designed protocols especially for thistype of network. Routing Protocol for Low power andLossy Network (RPL) has been proposed and standardizedin 2012, having Standard Documentation as RFC-6550. 4RPL is a distance–vector (dv) and a source routing protocolthat is designed to operate on top of several link layer,PHY, and MAC layers. The goal of RPL is to provide ipv6connectivity to a large number constrained (i.e. lossy linksand high packet error) devices and nodes of LLNs inindustrial, home, and urban environments. It is also havingtheir pre-defined Mode of Operations (MOP) 5.? MOP 0: No Downward routes maintained by RPL. Thismode only supports multipoint-to-point traffic forwhich motes can send packets to the RPL tree’s root.? MOP 1: Non-Storing Mode of Operation. Downwardroutes are supported but all IPv6 packets should beforwarded to the root which maintains all downwardroutes.? MOP 2: Storing Mode of Operation with no multicastsupport. The individual motes support downwardroutes by maintaining a routing table for theirsuccessors.? MOP 3: Storing Mode of Operation with multicastsupport. Identical to the previous MOP with theadditional support for point-to-multipoint trafficflows.Multicast is an essential property of any wireless sensornetwork that having the point to multipoint characteristicsof the mode of packet routing. RPL also having themulticast support that resides in its mode of operation(MOP 3) and optional for nodes in nature. But LLN havingsome issues regarding the reliability of the multicastoperation in RPL, although some of the solutions are toovercome it need research work to get better performanceof the multicast operation.II. T ECHNOLOGY D EVELOPMENTA. Computing PlatformsContiki 6 is a working framework for arranged, memory-compelled frameworks with an emphasis on the low-controlremote Internet of Things gadgets. Surviving utilizations forContiki incorporate frameworks for road lighting, soundchecking for shrewd urban communities, radiation observing,and cautions.Contiki gives three system instruments: the uIP TCP/IPstack, which gives IPv4 organizing, the uIPv6 stack, whichgives IPv6 organizing, and the Rime stack, which is anarrangement of custom lightweight systems administrationconventions intended for low-control remote systems. TheIPv6 stack was contributed by Cisco and was whendischarged, the littlest IPv6 stack to get the IPv6 Readyaccreditation. The IPv6 stack likewise contains the RoutingProtocol for Low power and Lossy Networks (RPL)directing convention for low-control lossy IPv6 systems andthe 6LoWPAN header pressure and adjustment layer forIEEE 802.15.4 connections.The Contiki system includes a network simulator calledCooja 7, which simulates networks of Contiki nodes. Thenodes may belong to either of three classes: emulated nodes,where the entire hardware of each node is emulated, Coojanodes, where the Contiki code for the node is compiled forand executed on the simulation host, or Java nodes, wherethe behavior of the node must be re-implemented as a Javaclass. One Cooja simulation may contain a mix of nodesfrom any of the three classes. Emulated nodes can also beused to include non-Contiki nodes in a simulated network.III. R ELATED W ORKSuresh et al. 8 authors survey some of the standard andnon-standard protocols that are used for network routing inIoT applications. Six routing protocols RPL, CTP, LOADng,LOAD, CORPL, CARP, and E-CARP in IoT were studied inthis paper. In the conclusion, they were stated that ‘RPL isthe most commonly used protocol among all of them’.Moreover, the comparison has been done over somecharacteristics of the network like server technology,security, and management aspects. They also showed theresults (regarding introductory information and generaladvantages) and simulation related information that usefulfor the implementation purpose. Although in the beginningthe characteristics of the network, Evolution to IoT,characteristics of IoT, issues that arise due to the change ofthe simple networking concept to the IoT and application ofIoT these topics and concepts have made. In the conclusionpart, they were stated RPL is popular but that is on the basisof usage not on the basis of characteristics, all the pros andcons were discussed but not concluded among them thatwhich protocol is used in the IoT Network on the aspects ofrange, scale, and other network related approach. Theinformational and general survey done by them, although itis good for the new researchers.R Jain et al. 9 authors discuss different standards offeredby IEEE, IETF, and ITU to enable technologies matching therapid growth in IoT. These standards includecommunication, routing, network and session layers of thenetworking stack that are being developed just to meetrequirements of IoT. The discussion also includesmanagement and security protocols. They also provided abrief comparison between different IoT protocols and how tochoose between them. Finally, they discussed somechallenges that still exist in IoT systems and researchers aretrying to solve them. All-over this survey paper has completeinformation about the protocols has been used in IoT atdifferent levels of network architecture. Some briefinformation with some working mechanism gives moreclarity towards concepts of protocols.Olfa Gaddour et al. 10 authors have introduced the natureand hierarchy of the technology that firms wired to thewireless network and now at IoT. Moreover, thecharacteristics of the LLN discussed in detail also. Further,the concept of the RPL has been elaborated in the specificsections are standardization, conceptual structure,importance, formation of network, control messageWe didn’t find any plagiarisms, modeof operations, message headers, working with the example,network management related concepts and performanceevaluation of RPL. On the basis of the performanceevaluation, they have suggested some routing protocols thatimplemented early for the wireless sensor network. From thatperspective, they compare all of them on the basis oftopology, scalability, mobility, memory usage, energy usagetraffic support etc. At the end, they discuss the relatedproblems and challenges for the future research work.Hyung-Sin Kim et al. 11 authors initiate with the conceptsof the IoT, wireless sensor network and LLN characteristics.Next, to them, RPL related introductory as well as somebrief and deep information provided. The core part of thispaper is the statistical and analytical summary of the workthat related to RPL has been provided first in the form of thetable that contains the Number that fills the cell between theyear and particular work field, also the simulation and OSrelated facts and figures given also in the table. Afterwards,the related work of the RPL discussed in a deep manner.Issues elaborated first than related work that already donethat stated by the increasing order of the year. At the end ofevery discussion, they have the key points knows as thestandard discussion and that problem or challenge raisedduring the discussion that provided the implication. Thispaper is made of the combined information of the 97 papersthat related to the RPL.George Oikonomou et al. 12 authors have introducedinitially the concept of the IoT. Afterwards, they give theintroduction and brief information about the multicastoperation in the traditional wireless sensor network and itsimportance towards the network. RPL having two types ofpacket forwarding operations that upward-downwardforwarding. In the downward forwarding and P2MP mode ofoperation, multicast has been supported in the RPL. For themulticast mechanism, two approaches have been stated,Trickle Multicast (TM) and Stateless Multicast in RPLForwarding (SMRF) both used in RPL. Both concWe didn’t find any plagiarismepts havebeen explained with the introduction, working and pros andcons. Although the information related to the performanceevaluation also given by the no. of perspective e.g. topology,No. of nodes, time interval etc. between TM and SMRF. Atthe conclusion part, they have stated that the multicastforwarding has been liable for the usage of the sensor andnodes, although they provided the comparison based analysisso the user can use as per requirement.Khaled Qorany et al. 13 authors presented a newmulticast-forwarding scheme called ESMRF. ESMRF is anenhanced scheme over SMRF which is known to suffer froma strong limitation with its sending operation. In addition,they demonstrated that ESMRF has the same performancewith SMRF in case the root of RPL is the source of multicasttraffic and provides a promising performance in the case ofthe highest rank node is the source of multicast traffic inwhich case SMRF totally fails to deliver any multicastpackets. In a random topology, ESMRF significantlyoutperforms both SMRF and TM. As an extension, they arecurrently devising an efficient service discovery schemeusing ESMRF for usage in 6LowPAN environments.Moreover, the ICMPv6 packet related herder informationand structure also discussed that transfers from the DODAGmember to the root.Bart Lemmens et al. 5: authors presented BMRF, amulticast forwarding algorithm for IPv6 based WSNs, whichaddresses some of the shortcomings of the currentlyavailable solutions. In particular mechanism, it allowssources of multicast traffic to be located inside the networkand support dynamic group registrations, at the expense of aslightly higher memory consumption. Moreover, theproposed protocol is configurable in order to trade-offenergy consumption, latency, and reliability. Althoughexperiments show that the proposed threshold for BMRFMixed mode succeeds in getting the best of Link Layerbroadcast and Link Layer unicast. For random topologies,the mixed mode only yields gain for channel check rateshigher than 8 Hz. For 8 Hz or less, the topology should beless randomized, but with parent motes with a lot of children(6 or more). When reliability is crucial, BMRF unicast is thebest choice, at the expense of a higher delay and energyconsumption.Kittithorn Tharatipayakul et al. 14 authors initiallydiscuss the conceptual information about the IoT. Afterward,the WSN and multicast related scenario have been discussedin terms of the years and methods that used to archivemulticast in RPL. They have introduced one new conceptiACK 14, the multicast technique that overcomes the consof the previous techniques Trickle Multicast and SMRF,although they remain the usage of the SMRF as the part ofthe mechanism. They show the scenario that in multicast theexplicit acknowledgment is used that made the delay andpacket overhead also. So they come up with the idea of theimplicit acknowledgment that nodes that having the samerank and having the member of multicast group retransmitthe packet among them that considered in the neighborpropagation operation. A specific static buffer memory isgiven to that node that stores the no. of the packet thatretransmitted at the specific time interval. Fig 3.1 shows theoperation of buffer management. Moreover, theretransmission list management and retransmission time-related variables and constant values have been alsodiscussed. Simulation results show iACK has considerablyhigher data delivery ratio compared to both SMRF and TM,and lower delay than TM (and only slightly larger thanSMRF). A key design point of iACK is that parameters canbe adjusted to select an appropriate tradeoff between delayand delivery ratio depending on the scenario. A drawback ofiACK is that it requires more memory in each node. Furtheranalysis is needed to evaluate the memory usage and theperformance of iACK in different topologies.IV. R ESEARCH C HALLENGESHere we have talked about the challenges that related tothe routing protocol that facing the related work and relatedcircumferences that take place to archive the reliability of therelated work of the multicast. There are also some of thework that related to RPL e.g. scalability, mobility, and up-down forwarding are also having some serious issuesregarding it but there also having some serious researchsolutions but multicast having mainly three issues.First, the delay that is very crucial in the LLN but also inthe RPL multicast. In the trickle multicast, it takes thepredefined time interval to trigger the sequence numbercount mechanism and get the error or the missing noderelated information but is the time interval is more thanbetween two interval period the packet might be lWe didn’t find any plagiarismost or notget at the time that leads toward the integrity.Second, the packet overhead condition. If we consider thescenario of the LB-Router that having the large amount andforce of packet that has been deployed in the relatednetwork, but if the router is not capable to take that much ofpressure than at the initial level we might lose the packets.This same scenario happens at the time of retransmission iniACK mechanism 11. At that time of retransmission everyneighbor node rebroadcast their buffered packets accordingto their retransmission list, but at the end, all the node mustaccept that packet once for checking purpose that thingmight cause that packet overhead condition.Third, the packet delivery ration. From the root the as perthe multicast mechanism only one copy of the packet hasbeen going through all over the network by the neighborbroadcast concept. But at the higher node sides having thelower packet delivery ration in compare to lower rank nodes.Moreover, they can recover that packet from the preferredparent but that might also the packet with the decreasedstrength of packet.All of the challenges that might not be overcome in oneapproach but it’s our best try to solve one of them in ourresearch work. Although the multicast related research workhaving little more focus on the decrement of the delay factorin the network, that might be visionary for the concept of asfast as to reach that leads towards low data loss andoverhead.V. C ONCLUSIONAs per the concept of the fractional value, Reliability isalso the Fractional proportional quality of any kind ofoperation, mechanism or systems. Although reliabilityhaving the more important in any kind of evaluation of theperformance. Early in the wireless sensor network that hasbeen archived by Automatic repeat request (ARQ) andForward Error Correction (FEC) methodologies. Here wetalk about RPL and its related work than among all thefunctionality, we focused on multicast functionality. In thatreliability of protocol in LLN means multicasting the packetshould be reached at the node in minimum or optimum timeand efforts. As previous. Related work satisfies one or moreissues related to multicast reliability but none of themovercome all the issues. Although iACK 14 satisfies thereliability criteria and dose the multicast in a good manner, itis also having the issues related to buffer size and data-packet overhead. So, The RPL multicast reliability archivedby newer or modified approach that may be traditional ornovel that satisfy challenges that stated in the previoussection that should be near to overcome all of them or get theperformance result better than all previous solutions.R EFERENCES12345LEACH: Internet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-energy_adaptive_clustering_hierarchy. September 22, 2017Aghera K., Pambhar H., Tada N. (2017) MMR-LEACH: Multi-tierMulti-hop Routing in LEACH Protocol. In: Modi N., Verma P.,Trivedi B. (eds) Proceedings of International Conference onCommunication and Networks. Advances in Intelligent Systems andComputing, vol 508. Springer, Singapore.Pambhar H., Aghera K., Tada N. (2017) Energy Efficient ClusterHead Selection in Energy-LEACH. In: Modi N., Verma P., Trivedi B.(eds) Proceedings of International Conference on Communication andNetworks. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, vol 508.Springer, Singapore.RFC 6550: Internet: https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6550. October1,2017Guillermo Gastón Lorente, Bart Lemmens, Matthias Carlier, AnBraeken, Kris Steenhaut (2016). BMRF: Bidirectional Multicast RPLForwarding. In The Journal of Ad Hoc Networks, Elsevier, 2016.67891011121314Contiki: Internet: http://www.contiki-os.org/. December 1,2017Fredrik ?Osterlind, Joakim Eriksson, Adam Dunkels. “CoojaTimeLine: A Power Visualizer for Sensor Network Simulation.”SenSys’10, November 3–5, 2010, Zurich, Switzerland.Hanumat Prasad Alahari, Suresh Babu Yalavarthi (2017,February). ASurvey on Network Routing Protocols in Internet of Things (IOT).International Journal of Computer Applications, Volume 160 – No 2,February 2017,IJCA.T Salman, R Jain (2016, January). Networking Protocols andStandards for Internet of Things. In Internet of Things and DataAnalytics Handbook, CH-13, Department of Computer Science,Washington University, St. Louis, MO, USA, 2016.Olfa Gaddour, Anis Koubâa (2012, July). RPL in a nutshell: A survey.In The Journal of Computer Networks, Elsevier,2012.Hyung-Sin Kim, JeongGil Ko, David E. Culler, and Jeongyeup Paek(2017). Challenging the IPv6 Routing Protocol for Low-Power andLossy Networks (RPL): A Survey. In IEEE Communications Surveys& Tutorials, 2017.George Oikonomou, Iain Phillips, and Theo Tryfonas. IPv6 multicastforwarding in RPL-based wireless sensor networks. The Journal ofComputer Networks, Springer Science.Khaled Qorany Abdel Fadeel, Khaled Elsayed (2015,). ESMRF:Enhanced Stateless Multicast RPL Forwarding for IPv6-based Low-Power and Lossy Networks. In IoT-Sys ’15,Workshop on IoTchallenges in Mobile and Industrial Systems.,2015.Kittithorn Tharatipayakul, Steven Gordon, KamolKaemarungsi(2014). iACK: Implicit Acknowledgements to ImproveMulticast Reliability in Wireless Sensor Networks. In IEEE,Telecommunications and Information Technology (ECTI-CON)-2014.