A Survey of Communication Protocols and Cloud Services for IoT Systems

Thanh Van Vu; Nguyen Ngoc Huong; Phan Tran Dang Khoa

doi:10.31130/ict-ud.2019.85

Thanh Van Vu The University of Danang - University of Science and Technology, Vietnam
Nguyen Ngoc Huong The University of Danang - University of Science and Technology, Vietnam
Phan Tran Dang Khoa The University of Danang - University of Science and Technology, Vietnam

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31130/ict-ud.2019.85

Abstract

The increasing number of IoT (Internet of Things) devices is accelerating the research on new solutions of communication protocols and cloud services. The selection of an effective communication protocol as well as a cloud service is a challenging task for any IoT project since it depends on particular requirements of the IoT system. In this paper, at first, we evaluate four main communication protocols, which are commonly used in IoT systems: MQTT (Message Queuing Telemetry Transport), CoAP (Constrained Application Protocol), AMQP (Advanced Message Queuing Protocol) and HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol). Afterwards, we perform an in-depth analysis of two cloud services for storing and transmitting data: CloudMQTT and Firebase Realtime Database (FRD). Finally, we perform a simple IoT system using FRD to demonstrate the efficiency of the cloud service. Based on the detailed evaluation, the user can choose an appropriate communication protocol and a cloud service for IoT systems according to their requirements.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] O. Hahm, E. Baccelli, H. Petersen, and N. Tsiftes, “Operating systems for low-end devices in the internet of things: a survey,”IEEE Internet of Things Journal, vol. 3, no. 5, pp. 720–734, 2015.
[2] Y. Xu, V. Mahendran,W. Guo, and S. Radhakrishnan, “Fairness in fog networks: Achieving fair throughput performance in mqtt-based iots,” in 2017 14th IEEE Annual Consumer Communications & Networking Conference (CCNC). IEEE, 2017, pp. 191–196.
[3] A. Zanella, N. Bui, A. Castellani, L. Vangelista, and M. Zorzi, “Internet of things for smart cities,” IEEE Internet of Things journal, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 22–32, 2014.
[4] P. Magrassi and T. Berg, “A world of smart objects,” Gartner research report R-17-2243, 2002.
[5] J. Dizdarevi´c, F. Carpio, A. Jukan, and X. Masip-Bruin, “A survey of communication protocols for internet of things and related challenges of fog and cloud computing integration,”ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR), vol. 51, no. 6, p. 116, 2019.
[6] J. E. Luzuriaga, M. Perez, P. Boronat, J. C. Cano, C. Calafate, and P. Manzoni, “A comparative evaluation of amqp and mqtt protocols over unstable and mobile networks,” in 2015 12th Annual IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference (CCNC). IEEE, 2015, pp. 931–936.
[7] C. Withanage, R. Ashok, C. Yuen, and K. Otto, “A comparison of the popular home automation technologies,” in 2014 IEEE Innovative Smart Grid Technologies-Asia (ISGT ASIA). IEEE, 2014, pp. 600–605.
[8] N. Naik, “Choice of effective messaging protocols for iot systems: Mqtt, coap, amqp and http,” in 2017 IEEE international systems engineering symposium (ISSE). IEEE, 2017, pp. 1–7.
[9] C. Khawas and P. Shah, “Application of firebase in android app development-a study,” International Journal of Computer Applications, vol. 975, p. 8887, 2018.