Internet-of-Things (IoT) technologies is projected to infiltrate nearly every aspect of everyday life, ranging from wearables to smart homes, healthcare to smart environments, event logistics, supply chain, and retail.
Despite the fact that current IoT-enabling technologies are developing by the day, heterogeneity remains a huge barrier that the IoT community must overcome.
This section highlights the different technologies that have made the Internet of Things possible.
1. Internet Protocol (IP).
Internet Protocol (IP): According to Bicknell, there are two types of Internet Protocol (IP): IPv4 and IPv6.
- Each of these unpredictably distinguishes IP addresses.
- As a rule, an IP address references to the tends to be characterized by IPv4 alone, which accommodates 4.3 billion places whereas IPv6 accommodates 128-bit (2128) addresses, hence allowing 4.4 x 1038 restrictive IP addresses.
2. Barcode.
A barcode is essentially a way of encoding characters and numbers that uses bars and gaps of varying widths in various combinations.
- Palmer's Bar Code Book enables the use of alternative information transmission mechanisms.
- Standardized tags are machine-readable markings attached to items that record data that may be used to identify the item.
- Scanner tags are designed to be undetectable by machines.
- Perusing is usually done using laser scanners, although it is also done with a camera.
3. Wireless Fidelity.
Wireless Fidelity, sometimes known as Wi-Fi, is a systems administration breakthrough that enables communication between PCs and other devices via a wireless signal.
- Wi-Fi is simply a WLAN component that adheres to IEEE standards802.11 8021.11a,802.11b, 802.11g, and 802.11n are connected with the double band.
- These Wi-Fi apps are converting whole metropolitan neighborhoods into Wi-Fi tunnels, which is a new norm these days.
4. Bluetooth.
It's a far-flung invention. This eliminates the need for cabling between devices such as PCs, PDAs, scratchpads, mobile phones, and so on.
- It operates with a range of 10–100 meters when using the IEEE 802.15.1 standard in this manner, making it practical.
5. Zigbee.
The data transmission rate of this breakthrough is 250 kbps, with a range of about 100 meters.
- This convention was created to improve the remote sensor organizations as well.
- It is a remote organization convention based on the IEEE 802.15.4 standard that explores its use in house robotization, brilliant agriculture, contemporary computerization, clinical analysis, and so on.
6. NFC stands for Near Field Communication.
NFC is a collection of short-range remote technology that operates at 13.56 MHz.
- It is well-liked because NFC makes life simpler and more beneficial for consumers all over the world by facilitating transactions, the sharing of sophisticated data, and the interfacing of electronic devices.
- The significant distance capabilities of NFC, which function at a range of 10 cm, are equivalent to Bluetooth and 802.11 conventions.
7. WSNs (Wireless Sensor Networks).
This is a remote organization made up of just free devices with sensors attached.
- Sensors are often used to monitor environmental factors such as sound, temperature, vibration, pressure, and so on.
- According to Arampatzis, T. et al., the WSN has a variety of devices that communicate with one another and send information from one to the next.
- In the IoT viewpoint, a remote sensor network is critical.
- IoT based on WSN has had a significant impact in a variety of areas, including medical care, manufacturing, line security, farmland observation, wilderness fire and food location, and so on.
8. RFID: Radio-Frequency Identification.
RFID is the first step in the creation of the Internet of Things (IoT).
- Active RFID, passive RFID, and semi-passive RFID are the three types of RFID.
- A tag, a peruser, a receiving wire, an entry regulator, a product, and a worker are the basic components.
- It is monetary, appealing, and respectable, and as a result, it can be relied upon.
- According to RFIDWorld.ca, the world has spent $ 6.37 billion on RFID chips; however, the IoT segment of the whole sector is expected to grow.
9. EPC stands for "Electronic Product Code."
It's an electronic code that's signed in bits and pieces on an RFID tag.
- It was first developed at MIT's Auto-ID center in 1999.
- "EPC Global" (2010) claims responsibility for Electronic Product Code (EPC) invention, which is used to share RFID data.
- The kind of EPC, the new chronic number of items, its determinations, manufacturer data, and so on may all be stored in an EPC code.
Find Jai on Twitter | LinkedIn | Instagram
References and Further Reading:
1. L. Atzori, A. Iera, G. Morabito, The internet of things: A survey. Comput. Netw. 54, 2787–2805 (2010)
2. H. Sundmaeker, P. Guillemin, P. Friess, S. Woelff̩, Vision and Challenges for Realizing the Internet of Things. CERP-IoT РCluster of European Research Projects on the Internet of Things (2010)
3. J. Belissent, Getting Clever About Smart Cities: New Opportunities Require New Business Models. Forrester Research (2010)
4. J. Gómez, J.F. Huete, O. Hoyos, L. Perez, D. Grigori, Interaction system based on internet of things as support for education. Procedia Comput. Sci. 21, 132–139 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.09.019
5. O. Vermesan, P. Friess, P. Guillemin, S. Gusmeroli, H. Sundmaeker, A. Bassi, I.S. Jubert, M. Mazura, M. Harrison, M. Eisenhauer, et al., Internet of things strategic research roadmap, in Internet of Things: Global Technological and Societal Trends, ed. by O. Vermesan, P. Friess, P. Guillemin, S. Gusmeroli, H. Sundmaeker, A. Bassi, et al., vol. 1, (River Publishers, Aalborg, 2011), pp. 9–52
6. M. Weiser, The computer for the 21st century. Sci. Am., 66–75 (1991) The Internet of Things: Sizing up the Opportunity. McKinsey (2014)
7. B.A. Li, J.J. Yu, Research and applications on the smart home based on component technologies and internet of things. Procedia Eng. 15, 2087–2092 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proeng.2011.08.390
8. D. Moeinfar, H. Shamsi, F. Nafar, Design and implementation of a low-power active RFID for container tracking @ 2.4 GHz frequency: Scientifc research, 2 (2012)
9. The Bar Code Book, Palmer (1995)
10. X.-Y. Chen, Z.-G. Jin, Research on key technology and applications for the internet of things. Phys. Procedia 33, 561–566 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.phpro.2012.05.104
11. T. Arampatzis, et al. A survey of security issues in wireless sensors networks, in intelligent control. Proceeding of the IEEE International Symposium on, Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation 2005, pp. 719–724
12. M. Chorost, The networked pill. MIT Technol. Rev. (2008, March)
14. O. Uviase, G. Kotonya, First workshop on architectures, languages, and paradigms for IoT. EPTCS 264, 1–17 (2018)
15. J. Kiljander, A. D’elia, F. Morandi, P. Hyttinen, J. Takalo-Mattila, A. YlisaukkoOja, J.-P. Soininen, T.S. Cinotti, Semantic interoperability architecture for pervasive computing and internet of things. IEEE Access 2, 856–873 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/ ACCESS.2014.2347992
16. P. Guillemin, F. Berens, O. Vermesan, P. Friess, M. Carugi, G. Percivall, Internet of Things: position paper on standardization for IoT technologies (2015). Available at http://www.internet-of-things-research.eu/pdf/IERC_Position_Paper_IoT_Standardization_Final.pdf
17. O. Vermesan, P. Friess, P. Guillemin, S. Gusmeroli, H. Sundmaeker, A. Bassi, I.S. Jubert, M. Mazura, M. Harrison, M. Eisenhauer, et al., Internet of Things Strategic Research Roadmap, vol 1 (Rivers Publishers, Aalborg, 2011), pp. 9–52
18. G. Xiao, J. Guo, L. Da Xu, Z. Gong, User interoperability with heterogeneous IoT devices through transformation. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 10(2), 1486–1496 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1109/tii.2014.2306772
19. S. Cheruvu, A. Kumar, N. Smith, D.M. Wheeler, IoT frameworks and complexity, in Demystifying Internet of Things Security, (Apress, Berkeley, 2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-2896-8_2
20. M. Burhan, R.A. Rehman, B.-S. Kim, B. Khan, IoT elements, layered architectures, and security issues: A comprehensive survey. Sensors 18 (2018). https://doi.org/10.3390/s18092796
21. D. Bicknell RFID: Moving beyond the pilot stage (2007, November 16). ComputerWeekly.com. http://www.comp-uterweekly.com/Articles/2007/11/16/228131/rfd-moving-beyond-the-pilot-stage.htm. Accessed 16, 27 Dec 2009
22. H. Suo, J. Wan, C. Zou, J. Liu, Security in the internet of things: A review. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Computer Science and Electronics Engineering (ICCSEE), Hangzhou, China, 23–25 March 2012, vol 3, pp. 648–651
23. D. Kozlov, J. Veijalainen; Y. Ali, Security and privacy threats in IoT architectures. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Body Area Networks, Oslo, Norway, 24–26 February 2012; ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences, Social-Informatics and Telecommunications
Engineering): Brussels, Belgium, 2012, pp. 256–262
24. X. Xiaohui, Study on security problems and key technologies of the Internet of things. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computational and Information Sciences (ICCIS), Shiyan, China, 21–23 June 2013, pp. 407–410
25. D. Darwish, Improved layered architecture for internet of things. Int. J. Comput. Acad. Res. 4, 214–223 (2015)
26. S. Madakam, R. Ramaswamy, S. Tripathi, Internet of things (IoT): A literature review. J. Comput. Commun 3, 164 (2015) [CrossRef]
27. R. Khan, S.U. Khan, R. Zaheer, S. Khan, Future internet: The internet of things architecture, possible applications, and key challenges. In Proceedings of the 2012 10th International Conference on Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), Islamabad, India, 17–19 December 2012, pp. 257–260
28. P. Sethi, S.R. Sarangi, Internet of things: Architectures, protocols, and applications. J. Electr. Comput. Eng 2017, 9324035 (2017) [CrossRef]
29. S.K. Muni, B. Booba, The usage of internet of things in transportation and logistics industry, in Intelligent Computing and Innovation on Data Science, Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, ed. by S. L. Peng, L. Son, G. Suseendran, D. Balaganesh, vol. 118, (Springer,
Singapore, 2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-3284-9_49
30. R. Somayya Madakam, S.T. Ramaswamy, Internet of things (IoT): A literature review. J. Comput. Commun. 3, 164–173 (May 2015). http://www.scirp.org/journal/jcc
31. F. Bonomi, R. Milito, P. Natarajan, J. Zhu, Fog computing: A platform for internet of things and analytics, in Big Data and Internet of Things: A Road Map for Smart Environments, (Springer, Berlin, 2014), pp. 169–186
32. Stojmenovic, S. Wen, The fog computing paradigm: Scenarios and security issues, in Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems (FedCSIS ‘14), IEEE, Warsaw, Poland, September 2014, pp. 1–8
33. M. Aazam, E.-N. Huh, Fog computing and smart gateway-based communication for the cloud of things, in Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud (FiCloud ‘14), Barcelona, Spain, August 2014, pp. 464–470
34. M. Muntjir, M. Rahul, H. Alhumiany, An analysis of internet of things (IoT): Novel architectures, modern applications, security aspects, and future scope with latest case studies. Build. Serv. Eng. Res. Technol. 6 (2017)
35. N. Bhumi, T. Champaneria, Study of various internet of things platforms. Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng. Surv. 6(6) (2015, December 2015)
36. A. Hakim, (IoT) System Architecture and Technologies. White Paper v1.0, Orange Expert – Network Operations, 2018
37. J. Gubbi, R. Buyya, S. Marusic, M.M. Palaniswami, Internet of things (IoT): A vision, architectural elements, and future directions. Futur. Gener. Comput. Syst. 29, 1645–1660 (2013) Elsevier
38. H. Ning, Z. Wang, Future internet of things architecture: Like mankind neural system or social organization framework. IEEE Commun. Lett. 15(4) (April 2011)