OPNET IT Guru Analysis of MPLS

implementation benefits in WSN over IP for

6LoWPAN networ no!es"
This Thesis is submitted to the school of engineering at ... partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of Master of Science/Technology in Electrical Engineering. The thesis is
equivalent to 20 wees of full time studies.
#onta$t Information
!age intentionally left blan
Abstra$t
Multiprotocol "abel Switching #M!"S$ is an emerging technology. %t is highly supported by the
fourth and fifth generation networs. %ts vital element is in its assurance to offer high internet
connection speeds with minimal delays. This paper analyses the lin utili&ation between two
networs of 'ireless Sensor (ode #'S($) having *"o'!+( as the end,to,end connection
nodes. The networs are designed with one using the M!"S technology) while the other using
the traditional %! (etwor. The two networs are modeled using -!(ET %T .uru Edition /.0.
The three parameters as Traffic 1eceived in bytes per second) !acets end,to,end delay and
!acets 2elay 3ariation are generated and compared for the two 'S( networ models. 4rom the
analysis of the results) one is able to draw conclusion that investing in M!"S technology will
ensure a stable networ with high networ throughput) high lin utili&ation and low latencies.
%eywor!s& M!"S #Multiprotocol "abel Switching$) 'S( #'ireless Sensor (etwors$)
*"o'!+( #%!v* over "ow !ower !ersonal +rea (etwors$) -ptimi&ed (etwor Engineering
Tool #-!(ET$) and 3!( #3irtual !rivate (etwors$.
A$nowle!'ement
% am grateful to my parents whose blessings have been abundantly and their unrelenting support
with encouragement that enabled me accomplishes this tas.
% do also dedicate this thesis to my dear family members.
%t is with great honor and privilege to than my thesis supervisor. 'ho guided me with his
scholarly sills. 'ithout his encouragement and guidance) this wor would not been achievable.
% sincerely e5press my heartfelt gratitude to him.
% also than my fellow collogues and friends for the team wor and support) they e5tended to me
during this pro6ect.
Than you all) % am forever indebted to you.
Table of Contents
+bstract........................................................................................................................ 4
+cnowledgement........................................................................................................... 5
"ist of 4igure.................................................................................................................. 8
+cronyms...................................................................................................................... 9
0.0 7hapter -ne............................................................................................................ 10
0.0 %ntroduction.......................................................................................................... 10
0.2 1esearch 8acground.............................................................................................. 10
0.9 The ob6ectives of the pro6ect..................................................................................... 11
0.2 1ationale for the pro6ect........................................................................................... 11
2.0 7hapter Two............................................................................................................ 11
"iterature 1eview....................................................................................................... 11
2.0 'ireless Sensor (etwors #'S($.............................................................................. 11
2.2 The *"o'!+( (ode.............................................................................................. 12
2.9 M!"S 1outing Technology....................................................................................... 15
9.0 7hapter Three.......................................................................................................... 18
9.0 1esearch Methodology............................................................................................ 18
9.2 The ethical consideration.......................................................................................... 18
9.9 !roposed M!"S and %! 2esign !rotocol and 7omponents.................................................19
9.9.0 M!"S %mplementation 2esign............................................................................. 19
9.9.2 7onventional %! %mplementation...........................................................................20
9.: 2esign +ssumptions............................................................................................... 20
9.; Simulation........................................................................................................... 21
9.* -!(ET Simulation................................................................................................. 21
9.< Simulation +ssumptions.......................................................................................... 22
:.0 7hapter 4our............................................................................................................ 22
:.0 -!(ET Simulation %mplementation............................................................................22
4.1.1 MPLS Simulation Model............................................................................. 23
:.0.2 7onventional %! Simulation Model........................................................................24
:.2 Modeling of 3o%! pacets in M!"S and %! networ........................................................25
;.0 7hapter 4ive............................................................................................................ 27
;.0 7omparison of !erformance metrics............................................................................ 27
;.2 2iagrammatic 1epresentation................................................................................... 28
*.0 7hapter Si5............................................................................................................. 30
*.0 7onclusion and 1ecommendation............................................................................... 30
*.2 4uture Study......................................................................................................... 31
1eference.................................................................................................................... 31
+ppendi5..................................................................................................................... 32
List of (i'ure
4igure 0, %nterconnection between 'S( and other e5ternal networ
4igure 2, 7omparison between %EEE =02.0;.: to other wireless technologies
4igure 9, The *"o'!+( layered architecture
4igure :, Sample +rchitecture of *"o'!+( in a Mobile Telephony (etwor
4igure ;, M!"S,3!( networ lining several client sites via a single Service !rovider
4igure * > M!"S !roposed %mplementation diagram
4igure < > 7onventional %! !roposed %mplementation diagram
4igure = , M!"S Simulation Model
4igure /, 7onventional %! Simulation Model
4igure 00 > +pplication 2efinition ob6ect
4igure 00 > !rofile 2efinition ob6ect
4igure 02 7omparison for Traffic received in bps in M!"S and %! 'S( model
4igure 09, !acets end,to,end delay comparison for M!"S and %! Model 'S( model
4igure 0: , !acet 2elay variation comparison for M!"S and %! 'S( networ
A$ronyms
M!"S Multiprotocol "abel Switching
T7!/%! Transmission 7ontrol !rotocol/ %nternet !rotocol
%!v* %nternet !rotocol version :
"E1 "abel Edge 1outer
"S1 "abel Switching 1outer
"S! "abel Switch !ath
"2! "abel 2istribution !rotocol
4E7 4orward Equivalence 7lass
3o%! 3oice over %nternet !rotocol
?oS ?uality of Service
1TT! 1eal Time Transport !rotocol
71,"2! 7onstraint 8ased "abel 2istribution !rotocol
71,"S! 7onstraint 8ased "abel Switch !ath
1S3! 1esource 1eservation !rotocol
-S!4 -pen Shortest !ath 4irst
"%8 "abel %nformation 8ase
3!( 3irtual !rivate (etwor
-S!4 -pen Shortest !ath 4irst
8.! 8order .ateway !rotocol
'S( 'ireless Sensor (etwors
*"o'!+( %!v* over "ow !ower !ersonal +rea (etwors
-!(ET -ptimi&ed (etwor Engineering Tool
)"* #+apter One
)") Intro!u$tion
This pro6ect investigates the advantage of using M!"S as a routing protocol and a *"o'!+( as
an end node for a 'ireless Sensor (etwors #'S($. The pro6ect uses -!(ET simulator to
model M!"S in a 'S( to analy&e networ parameters as delay) throughput) ping statistics)
tracert) and latency.
)", -esear$+ .a$'roun!
The M!"S is a connection, oriented pacet networing technology. %t enables many carriers to
converge their "TE networs to M!"S. M!"S technology has been considered to lower the
capital e5penditure #7apE@$ and operational e5penses #-pE5$ as compared to the traditional
time,division multiple5ing #T2M$ a circuit switched technology. Aence employing M!"S in a
'ireless Sensor (etwors will see an organi&ation reduce on these 7apE@ and -pE5 cost. The
two M!"S standards are %!/M!"S and M!"S,T! #The Multiprotocol "abel Switching,Transport
!rofile$. The 7isco systems have had a pusedowire,based M!"S being adopted for the transport
layer in -S% model for the networ services.
The %!v* over "ow !ower !ersonal +rea (ewors #*"o'!+($ have enabled the 'S( devices
to have seamless connection to the internet. The *"o'!+( provides a gateway for the pacets
to be %! addressable with an end to end connectivity.
)"/ T+e ob0e$tives of t+e pro0e$t
The pro6ect aims to evaluate e5perimentally the advantages of using M!"S in 'ireless Sensor
(etwor. 4rom the e5periment the networ parameters networ throughput) latency and etc.
)", -ationale for t+e pro0e$t
The emergence of :
th
generation networs have been designed to support pacet switched
technology unlie the traditional circuit switched networs. These circuit switched networs uses
the Time 2ivision Multiple5ing routing technology which are not supported by the "ong Term
Evolution generation networ architecture currently being used by the Mobile telephony
providers. This maes the research viable as the new design of the 'S( devices in the "TE
design supports the pacet switched technology used in the M!"S routing technology.
,"* #+apter Two
Literature -eview
,") Wireless Sensor Networs 1WSN2
'S( is a networ of wireless nodes having capability of measuring physical variables. The
devices are embedded in nature) consisting of memory) sensors) microcontrollers) wireless
interface) batteries and a programmable interface #8ecer 200: 00$. The field of Micro Electro,
Mechanical Systems #MEMS$ has enabled the miniaturi&ation of these nodes a capacity of less
than one centimeter cubic. The 'S( ability to measure physical variables enables the
measurement of physical world variables in a virtual environment.
%n order to maintain technical and economical feasibility) the 'S( nodes manufacture taes
considerations of the critical resources lie processing power) energy) and bandwidth available
for communication.
The integration of 'S(s in %! networ has made it possible to integrate data into a business
processes. This in itself forms the precursor to the universal acceptance of the 'S(s. The
*"o'!+( internet gateway lying at the networ layer in the %! layer) it has made it mode
feasible to feed %! pacets into 'S(s #8ecer 200: 09$.
The implementation of %nternet !rotocol 3ersion *#%!v*$ in 'S(s is made possible because of
other factors lie interoperability of other %! standards) abundance tools lie ping) tracer route)
and telnet for networ management) and the security solutions lie access controls and firewalls
that have been developed #8ecer 0: 200:$.The diagram below shows the interconnection
between 'S( and other e5ternal networs.
4igure 0, %nterconnection between 'S( and other e5ternal networ
,", T+e 6LoWPAN No!e
This is an %EEE =02.0;.: protocol accepted as a !AB and M+7 layer protocol being used for
"o'!+(. %t was created by %ET4 to define the applicability of %!v* over %EEE =02.0;.: by
introducing an additional layer between networ and data lin layer) this is as illustrated in the
figure below #Sinniah) Suryady) Sarwar) +bbas 2009 2$ The diagram below compares the %EEE
=02.0;.: standard to other wireless technologies
4igure 2, 7omparison between %EEE =02.0;.: to other wireless technologies
The protocol stac for the *"o'!+( gateway in a layered architecture is as illustrated in the
diagram below)

4igure 9, The *"o'!+( layered architecture
The %!v* as low power over wireless personal area networs #"o'!+($ is a protocol gateways
used between the data lin and the networ layer in the %! model. The gateway acts as a router
whilst performing traffic filtration #-leveira) 1odrigues) Macao) (icolau) 'ang) Shu 2009 2$.
The *"o'!+( system is built by integrating the %EEE=02.0;.: with other standard internet
interface lie 'i,4i) 'iM+@) and Ethernet) with the gateway having a dual stac as illustrated
in the diagram above #Sinniah) Suryady) Sarwar) +bbas 2009 :$ .The protocol has three modules
namely *"o'!+( #'S($ module providing hardware compliance) e5ternal interface module
defining the M+7 and !hysical interfaces) and Service Module providing for %!v* and
*"o'!+( pacets handling.
The ey components of *"o'!+( gateways being the (ode management consisting of periodic
logger) map table) node discovery) address translation and %!v* predefined prefi5. The other ey
component is pacet transition and handling being made up of pacet transformation) pacet
handler and remote addressing #Sinniah) Suryady) Sarwar) +bbas 2009 2$.The diagram below
illustrates an e5ample of *"o'!+( networ diagram.

4igure :, Sample +rchitecture of *"o'!+( in a Mobile Telephony (etwor
,"/ MPLS -outin' Te$+nolo'y
This is pacet,forwarding technology that maes use of labels in maing the decisions in
forwarding the data #7isco System 200= 2$. Aere the layer 9 header analysis is carried out only
once when the pacets are entering the M!"S domain) but the label inspection aids in subsequent
pacet forwarding. M!"S gives special and beneficial applications such as Traffic Engineering
#TE$) ?uality of Service #?oS$) 3irtual !rivate (etworing #3!($) and +ny Transport over
M!"S #+ToM$. %n addition to the beneficial applications) M!"S also decrease the overhead
associated with pacet forwarding in the core routers #7isco System 200= 9$.
The label is a short four,byte) fi5ed in length local significant identifier for deciding and
identifying a 4orwarding Equivalence 7lass #4E7$ #7isco System 200= :$. Aence a particular
label on a given pacet represents the 4E7 assigned to that pacet. The figure below shows a
4E7 diagram.
The 4E7 has the following parts as illustrated in the above diagramC
"abelC .ives the label unstructured value made up of 20 bits
E5pC E5perimental Dsing 9 bits forming the 7lass of Service #7oS$ field
SC 8ottom of Stac made of 0 bit
TT"C Time to live made up of =bits
The M!"S transports traffic using 3"") !seudo wire) 3!"S and %! 3!(s. %t uses -pen Shortest
!ath 4irst #-S!4$ as he %nterior .ateway !rotocol #%.!$ in supporting the setting up of its paths.
The M!"S high availability is ensured using faster path restoration and networ re,convergence
in a time of ;0ms. This end,to,end restoration of M!"S 411 ensures networ resilience. This
high availability is important for mission,critical video) voice and data information. The M!"S
411 ensures interruptions of these critical services are minimi&ed during networ failure. The
M!"S hence provide cold and hot,standby used for protecting active path. This is implemented
using "abel 2istribution !rotocol and (onstop services in 3!"S and %! 3!M #7isco System
200/ 2$.
M!"S traffic engineering allows the best path to be selected in a networ) to ensure optimi&ation
of the bandwidth) while the ?uality of Service by providing weighted queuing or strict priority
implanted in 7isco switched as 3"+(s.
M!"S also offers effective networ management using simplified tools allowing for easier
configuration) problem isolation and resolution) networ control) and support on new application
management.
The two standards for M!"S are the M!"S,T! and the %!/M!"S) the hybrid of the two called
the !seudowire,based M!"S is adopted in transporting the networ pacets. The M!"SET!
supports native transport models) supports ?oS) whilst supporting the -peration) +dministration
and Maintenance #-+M$ mechanism of protection that is available in traditional technologies
#7isco System 200/ 2$
The M!"S,T! is a transport networ with functions lie !enultimate Aop !opping #!A!$)
"abel,Switched !aths #"S!s$ merged) and the Equal 7ost Multi !ath #E7M!$.
The diagram below illustrates an e5ample of M!"S,3!( networ)
4igure ;, M!"S,3!( networ lining several client sites via a single Service !rovider
/"* #+apter T+ree
/") -esear$+ Met+o!olo'y
This section analyses the pro6ect design) analyses the architecture of M!"S diagram in 'S(s
designed using the -p(et simulator. The diagram is then simulated and the networ parameters
lie throughput) tracert route) networ latency are measured.
The pro6ect is implemented using two diagrams) one applying the use of M!"S while the other
not. These two diagrams are analy&ed for the networ parameters above and a conclusion is
drawn on the effects of implementing a networ using M!"S whether the core four ob6ectives
lie high availability) few interruption) quality of service#?oS$ and operation) application and
maintenance#-+M$ is reali&ed.
/", T+e et+i$al $onsi!eration
The pro6ect is viable as it lays more emphasis to the benefits drawn from applying M!"S
technology is 'S(s as opposed to the traditional T2M) this is because most of the current
(etworing devices in the fourth generation are designed to used pacet,switching routing
technology that does not gives fi5ed bandwidth) but a variable hence eliminating the wastage
associated with circuit switched technologies. The values of money) networ resilience)
availability) quality of service and the ease operational maintenance derived from employing
M!"S technology maes this pro6ect beneficial.
/"/ Propose! MPLS an! IP 3esi'n Proto$ol an! #omponents
/"/") MPLS Implementation 3esi'n
The design is done for an M!"S 3!( networs assuming that the customers site is having
8order .ateway !rotocol #8.!$ or 1outing %nformation !rotocol #1%!$. This configuration will
allow several sites to interconnect through a secure tunnel on the service providerFs networ.
3!( is being associated to at least one 3!( routing or forwarding occurrences #314s$) with
each 314 having %! routing table. The routers used in the design have Multiprotocol 8.! #M!,
8.!$ that distributes the 3!( routing information to its e5tended community.
4igure * > M!"S !roposed %mplementation diagram
The components used in the design are 7lient Switch ) 7lient "E1) M!"S "S1) S! 3S+T and
the S! 0.b mbps as a redundant lin. The "S1 1outers must be 7isco series <200 or higher
running %-S release 02.9 that are capable of supporting M!"S 3!( configuration) while the
"S1 routers should have the ability of e5changing the routing information with the M!"S "S1
routers.
/"/", #onventional IP Implementation
The design is done for an %!/3!( networs assuming that all other conditions used in M!"S
above are held constant) but only the M!"S "S1 and "E1 routers are now replaced with
standard %! 1outers that does not support M!"S functionality. The diagram is illustrated as
below.
4igure <, 7onventional %! proposed implementation diagram
/"4 3esi'n Assumptions
The designing of the M!"S 3!( for remote %! pacets tunneling for different client sites in
remote sites assumes the following conditions are satisfied for the design ob6ectives to be
reali&ed.
+ 7isco 1outer 2*00 or higher having %-S release 02.9
The devices in use have default configuration as their initial state
The client site supports 8order .ateway !rotocol #8.!$ or 1outing %nformation !rotocol
#1%!$
The end,to,end node for the 'S( devices in the cloud are utili&ing the *"o'!+( %!
routing and addressing
/"5 Simulation
This is the process for creating abstract representation of an e5isting or a proposed system) so as
to predict the behavior or understand the controlling factors. +mong the several simulation tools
lie ?ual(ET ) (etwor Simulator) and -!(ET) the proposed system design was sub6ected to
simulation using -!(ET to help reali&e it strength and weaness of the system as pertain the
networ parameters belowC
The quality of service #?oS$
Aow Secure the system is
-ptimal routing of pacets
(etwor latency
-verlay between clients sites
-ptimal routing targets
+bility for Service providers to mae optimal use of networ resources whilst complying
to the ?uality of Service #?oS$ and Service "evel +greements #S"+s$ with the clients
/"6 OPNET Simulation
The main simulation tas will involve analy&ing the importance of M!"S in the 3!(
networing that is maing use of the *"o'!+( as the end to end node connection for the 'S(
devices that are maing the internet cloud. The simulator will help compare the performance of
two networ diagrams. -ne designed using M!"S while the other designed using other
technologies lie %! routing. The following parameters will be compared for the two networsG
Traffic 1eceived in bytes per second for M!"S vs. %! (etwor
!acets end,to,end delay for M!"S vs. %! (etwor
!acets 2elay 3ariation for M!"S 3s. %! (etwor
To accomplish this tas) data traffic is used across the two 'S( networsG one designed using
M!"S while the other designed using traditional %! routing technology. The results obtain from
simulation are analy&ed to determine the performance levels of the two networ design.
/"6 Simulation Assumptions
The difficulty in prediction of the behavior of M!"S design in the 'S( networ because there
are many different implementation entities that play a ey factor in the design. This varies when
modeling the networ parameters. %n this pro6ect we simulated different 'S( networs one
design with M!"S using the 8.! or 1%! routing protocols) while the other is 'S( networ that
is modeled using traditional %! routing technologies.
4"* #+apter (our
4") OPNET Simulation Implementation
The simulation for M!"S and traditional %! networs are employed in the -!(ET %T .uru
+cademic Edition /.0. The simulation is setup into two main scenarios.
Scenario 0 consist of implementing 'S( using M!"S as the routing technology
Scenario 2 consist of implementing 'S( using traditional %! routing
8oth the networs are simulated assuming that both are implemented using a common
topology.
4.1.1 MPLS Simulation Model
4igure = > M!"S Simulation Model
The figure above shows M!"S networ model consisting of the following networ elements.
2 "E1 7lient 1outers
2 "S1 M!"S 1outers
2 7lient Switches
9 7lient worstations
0 4ile server
The "S1 and "E1 routers are connected using !!! 2S9 connectors) while the worstation and
switches connected by Ethernet 0008aseT.
%n this scenario 3oice over %!#3o%!$ pacet is transmitted across the networ from the
worstation from the remote site to the other) and the parameters as Traffic 1eceived in bytes
per second) !acets end,to,end delay and !acets 2elay 3ariation are computed graphically from
the simulation results.
The 3o%! pacets are established in the simulation above by modeling the application and profile
definition utilities. The application definition is set to a definition is set to a default application
profile) while the profile definition is set to have telecom profile that has one voice over %! call
application. This is discussed more in the ne5t sections.
4")", #onventional IP Simulation Mo!el
4igure /, 7onventional %! Simulation Model
The figure < above represents the conventional %! Simulation model. %n this case the M!"S "S1
routers are replaced with the ordinary %! routers. The M!"S attribute is also replaced with %!
3!( attribute. Aence the pacets are routed using -S!4 protocol that does not tae capacity
constraint into consideration. The 3o%! pacets are transmitted from Site + to 8 using the same
procedure as was in the M!"S scenario.
4", Mo!elin' of 7oIP pa$ets in MPLS an! IP networ
%n modeling an application in -!(ET) an ob6ect called application definition is used. This
consists of preprogrammed applications that can be customi&ed) depending on the customers
demand. Some of the application definitions attributes are email) file transfer) https) 3oice over
%! 6ust to mention a few.
4igure 00 > +pplication 2efinition
The figure = above shows application definition attributes. %n this model we have used voice over
%! call #!7M quality$. The application definition is set to default to automatically load the
default service attribute defined in the profile definition.
The profile definition is then used to describe the behavior of the worstations. %t describes the
start of the simulation) operation mode and the duration. %n this case the simulation was set to
have e5ponential operation) serial operation mode and duration of /00 seconds as indicated in
the profile definition attribute below.
4igure 00, !rofile 2efinition -b6ect
The -!(ET tas of determining the 3o%! traffic received in bps) pacets end,to,end delay and
pacet delay variation are determined by configuring the profile to add 3o%! calls in fi5ed
interval) with the process repeated till the end of the simulation.
The first 3o%! call is stabled at the :0
th
second of the simulation) for every 2 seconds of 3o%!
calls added to the simulation .+dditional voice calls are then done by repeating till the end of the
simulation. This allows the 3o%! traffics to be added continuously at a constant interval hence
determine networ throughput in terms of traffic received in bps) end,to,end pacet delay and
variation in pacet delay for the two modeled networs.
5"* #+apter (ive
5") #omparison of Performan$e metri$s
The results in the figures 02) 09 and 0: are the performance metrics resulting from the simulation
of the M!"S and the conventional %! (etwors. 4rom the graph of pacet received in bytes per
second it can be observed that the M!"S received a higher number of pacets in bps as
compared to the conventional %! networ. The figure 02) also illustrates that the %! networs has
a higher pacet end,to,end delay as compared to the networ having M!"S. This shows the low
latency reali&ed in a networ that uses M!"S as the routing technology. 4inally the figure 0:
shows that non M!"S networs depicts a very high variation of pacet delays) this has adverse
effect on the networ performance) as opposed to M!"S networs that has a low variation in the
pacet delays.
5", 3ia'rammati$ -epresentation
4igure 02 7omparison for Traffic received in bps in M!"S and %! 'S( model
4igure 09, !acets end,to,end delay comparison for M!"S and %! Model 'S( model
4igure 09C !acet 2elay variation comparison for M!"S and %! 'S( networ
6"* #+apter Si8
6") #on$lusion an! -e$ommen!ation
The main ob6ective of this pro6ect was to determine the advantage of employing M!"S define in
a 'S( networs by considering ey networ parameters as pacet quantity transmitted) pacet
end,to,end delay and the variation in the pacet delay.
The pro6ect started with a literature review) then the design and implementation of design using
-!(ET simulator.
The finding from the comparison metrics and the resultants diagrams help in answering the
research question earlier stated advantages of M!"S over other networs technologies for a
'S( networ. 4rom the results analysis) it can be seen that the benefit an organi&ation will gain
by deploying M!"S networ) is far much compared to other technologies. They stand to gain on
stable and faster networ access) low latency and lower delay variation that often leads to pacet
distortion
6", (uture Stu!y
This pro6ect wor laid more emphasis on the performance of 3o%! traffic between M!"S and
7onventional %!. The future wor can be carried out to investigate the performance of M!"S
3o%! using signaling protocols 71,"2! and 1S3!. This will rather be interesting as one will be
required to consider the codecFs of the 3o%! application. This will give rise to interesting
comparative metrics.
-eferen$e
+lcatel "ucent#200/$. IP/MPLS Networks for Highways. Infrastructures for highly available mission-
critical communications
7isco Systems#200=$. MPLS !" or #eginners. 7isco Systems %nc.
7isco Systems#200/$. $n%erstan%ing MPLS-&P an% Its #enefits. 7isco System %nc. !ublication
8ecer M #200:$ Services in 'ireless Sensor Networks( +dvanced Studies Mobile 1esearch
7enter
-leveira et al.#2009$.)n%-to-)n% *onnectivity IPv+ over 'ireless Sensor Networks accessed at
htt,-//www.iaria.ournals.org/systems/an%/measurements /
Sinniah .. et al. #2009$. +Lo'P!N 0ateway System for 'ireless Sensor Networks an%
Performance !nalysis
Appen!i8
2iagrammatic representation on results comparing the M!"S and the %! 1outing technology for
traffic received) pacet end,to,end delay and pacet delay variation.
M!"S 1outing
%! 1outing