Internet of Things (IoT): A Survey on Architecture, Enabling
Technologies, Applications and Challenges
Arindam Giri Subrata Dutta
Haldia Institute of Technology Haldia Institute of Technology
Haldia Haldia
India India
ari_giri11@gmail.com subrataduttaa@gmail.com
Keshav Dahal
University of the West of
ScotlandUnited Kingdom
keshav.dahal@uws.ac.uk
ABSTRACT
Convergence of the two technologies- Internet and sensing
networks creates a paradigm, Internet of Things (IoT) which
allows direct machine-to-machine(M2M) communication. The
IoT has transformed human-to-human and human-to-machine
communication to machine-to-machine communication. It
encompasses huge number of heterogeneous smart devices that
collaborates each other to achieve different smart application
goals like smart cities, connected cars, etc.Though Radio
Frequency Identification (RFID), wireless, mobile and sensor
technologies make IoT feasible, it suffers from many challenges
like scalability, security, and interoperability. This article presents
a comprehensive overview of IoT and survey of existing
architectures, enabling technologies, applications and research
challenges for IoT.
KEYWORDS
Internet of Things, smart devices,Machine-to-Machine
communication, RFID.
1 INTRODUCTION
“Internet of Things” is envisaged to be a world-wide network of
interconnected unique Internet-enabled e-devices, based on
standard communication protocols.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for
personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are
not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies
bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for
components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored.
Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to
post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission
and/or a fee. Request permissions from Permissions@acm.org.
IML '17, October 17-18, 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
© 2017 Association for Computing Machinery.
ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-5243-7/17/10…$15.00
http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/ 3109761.3109768
Sarmistha Neogy
Jadavpur University
Kolkata
India
sarmisthaneogy@yahoo.com
Zeeshan Pervez
University of the West of Scotland
United Kingdom
zeeshan.pervez@uws.ac.uk
Objective is to have internet-enabled things including computers,
mobile phones, RFID tags, to name a few, with unique address
connected to the network dynamically, interact on collaborative
basis to fulfill different tasks like e-health. It is estimated that
authors estimated that 212 billion smart objects will join in IoT by
2020 [1]. Authors in [2] give a clear picture on different market
shares of IoT by 2025. Out of $2.7 to $6.2 trillion economic
growth by IoT itself, healthcare and related sector (possessing
41%share) are expected to create an annual growth of $1.1- $2.5
globally by 2025. The impact areas next to healthcare are
manufacturing possessing 33%, electricity possessing 7%,
agriculture and security 4% each of total economic impact of IoT.
In the near future, all devices like refrigerator, washing machine,
microwave oven, etc., will be turned into smart devices with
computing and communication capabilities. The interconnected
devices will keep on sharing information globally over the
Internet. This effort develops a pervasive computing environment.
Transportation and home automation industries are growing
rapidly with IoT also. Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) has been
implemented in wide application areas for collecting
environmental or physiological information. Without WSN, IoT
cannot be built. But due to scalability and heterogeneity of IoT,
there are challenges to incorporate them in the WSN. The
potentiality of IoT can be exploited in many domains like
healthcare, transportation, environmental monitoring, personal
and social, smart city, industrialcontrol, and many more.
Several survey papers are published on IoT covering many
aspects of it. IoT architecture and challenges to develop
applications are included in [3]. A state of the art review on
enabling technologies, protocols, application and research
challenges is done in [4,5]. Existing IETF standards and
challenges are included in [6] while communication technology
and WSN elements are discussed in [7]. The middleware is a
software layer placed between the technological and the
application layers. The middleware for IoT is surveyed in [8,9].
Then service composition is essential for efficient exchange and
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom A.Giri et al.

aggregation of data and events introduced by IP networked things 3.1 Identification, sensing and communication
in various application domains. Han et al. [10] explain the technologies
challenges of service composition in IoT. To the best of our
Every object in IoT must be identifiable. Electronic Product Code
knowledge, no survey is available which covers all aspects of IoT
(EPC) and ubiquitous code (uCode) [18] are popular in IoT for
like enabling technologies, protocol stack, standards, middleware
this purpose. Addressing is performed in order to make IoT
solution, related projects, application, and research
objects globally identifiable. IPv4 and IPv6 provide addressing in
challenges.This paper presents a comprehensive survey on recent
the communication network. 6LoWPAN [19] is used over IPv6
advances in IoT including all aspects, while pointing out their
for low power wireless network. Development in wireless
limitations.
technologies has led to us a new era where almost all objects are
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2
attached with radios. Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) [15]
describes state-of-the-art of IoT architectures. Enabling
plays a major role in this context. RFID promotes development of
technologies of IoT are presented in Section 3. Section 4 presents
a cost effective solution for universal pervasive computing [20]. A
important application areas of IoT. Section 5 explains IoT
RFID system has few RFID readers and several RFID tags. Tags
initiatives made by different countries and organizations through
provide unique identification while readers transmit appropriate
related projects and standardization activities. Challenges and
signalsto and from the tag. The detailed physical configuration
research directions in IoT are mentioned in Section 6 and
ofRFID system can be found in [21].
conclusion is drawn in Section 7.
2 IoT ARCHITECTURE Wireless Sensor Network (WSN) acts as a backbone in IoT. It
As IoT deals with heterogeneous connected devices, a flexible consists of intelligent sensors able to collect, process, disseminate
layered architecture is needed to support them. In spite of many and analyze valuable data from environment[7].WSN has been
proposed architectures none of them is accepted as a general successfully used in environmental monitoring, military
architecture. Even the existing TCP/IP based Internet architecture applications, agriculture, smart health, automation and control,
is not able to handle such a large network as IoT. There is a need etc. Nodes in WSN send data in single or multi-hop manner to the
for a new architecture that will be able to manage such a huge IoT base station.
network and address challenges like scalability, Quality of Service Typically, WiFi, Bluetooth, IEEE 802.15.4 are used for
(QoS), privacy and security of both users and information/data. It communication in IoT. WiFi uses radio signal to provide
must have security measures against unauthorized use/change of communication among smart devices within 100 m range [22].
personal data. Individual IoT devices and service providers must Near Field Communication (NFC is also used in IoT application
be secured from attackers. For example, tampering of smart meter [23].
or smart watch must be brought to the knowledge of provider or
owner immediately.
In Fig. 1, different architectures proposed for IoT are depicted.
Among the architectures for IoT proposed so far-[11–14], some of
them are application-specific while rests are general purpose. The
generic architectures are proposed as multi-layered concept.
Multi-layered IoT architectures can be classified as: 3-layer
architecture, 4-layer architecture, 5-layer architecture, and 6-layer
architecture [4]. Among the recently proposed IoT architectures
[12-14], the Service Oriented Architecture (SOA)-based model is
most prominent in the 5-layer category. It encourages middleware Figure 1: IoT Architectures: a) Three layer, b) 4-layer, c) 5-
layer, and d) SOA-based [4].
technology. More details about middleware technology can be
found in Section 3.2.
Table 1. Comparison of layered architectures
Acomparisonof different architectures based on reliability,
security, scalability and QoS is done in Table 1.
Model Referenc Securit Scalabili Reliabil QoS
es y ty ity
3 ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES 3-layer [15] x x x x
4-layer [16],[13], √ x x √
Realization of IoT is made possible through the integration of
[17]
information and communication technologies (ICT) in the form of 5-layer [4] √ x x x
hardware and software. In this section, we briefly discussabout SOA [9],[8] √ x √ √
state-of-the-artof key players in IoT and mention their design
challenges. Bluetooth encourages low power communication over short
distances among devices [24]. The IEEE 802.15.4 standard has
limitation that it defines physical layer and Medium Access

2
Internet of Things (IoT): A Survey on Architecture, Enabling
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Technologies, Applications and Challenges

Control (MAC) layer for low power wireless personal area shown in Fig.1 uses a middleware technology. It is used in many
network, but doesn’t have specifications for higher layers in applications like vehicular network [11,39] and is being currently
protocol stack. A glimpse on existing wireless communication used in IoT. This section discusses functional components and a
standardswhich may be used in IoT or any application field like classification of state-of-the-art of middleware solutions.
WSN, ambient intelligence, mobile phone etc. is included in Table
An IoT middleware consists of four functional blocks: 1)
2.
interface protocols, 2) deviceabstraction, 3) central control,
World Wide Web Consortium (W3C), Internet Engineering context detection and management, and 4) application abstraction,
Task Force (IETF), EPC Global, Institute of Electrical and as depicted in Fig. 2.
Electronics Engineers (IEEE) and European Telecommunications 3.2.1 Interface protocols- define protocols for information
Standards Institute (ETSI) contributed to development of M2M exchange among different things across different networks. It
communication protocols in addition to aforementioned wireless deals with connectivity issue in physical layer to upper layers in
communication standard. Other protocols which are useful to IoT TCP/IP protocol stack.
includes Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP) [25, 26],
3.2.2 Device abstraction- defines abstract model of devices to
REpresentational State Transfer (REST) protocol, Message Queue
Telemetry Transport (MQTT), Extensible Messaging and facilitate interaction among heterogeneous devices. This
Presence Protocol (XMPP) [28]. It promotes open, secure and abstraction includes syntactic and semantic interoperation.
spam-free communication between users by instant messaging. Interoperation among devices is served through several APIs.
Authentication, privacy management and access control are also APIs defined in middleware performs syntactic or semantic
supported by XMPP. To address high scalability in IoT efficient interoperation. Syntactic interoperation looks into format of the
dynamic resource management protocols are needed. Multicast information while semantic interoperation looks into meaning of
DNS (mDNS) and DNS Service Discovery(DNS-SD) are two the exchanged information.
prominent protocols that aim at discovering resources and services 3.2.3 Central control, context detection and management- context
provided by IoT [29]. The Routing Protocol for Low Power and awareness is essential for middleware in IoT. In IoT, a context is
Lossy Networks (RPL) developed by IETF is an example of IPv6- a situation about a device or thing. This functional block performs
based routing protocol. It was designed to support minimum context-aware computing to betterunderstand sensor data and then
routing requirements byproviding a strong topology over lossy make decision based on data [40]. But most of the IoT
links. The IETF working group also developed IPv6 over Low middleware solutions proposed recently are not able to perform
power Wireless Personal Area Network (6LoWPAN). This context-aware computing. So, context-aware IoT computing is a
protocol acts as an adaptation layer and is designed to fit IPv6 promising area of research which is being promoted by the
packets to IEEE 802.15.4 specifications. The IEEE 802.15.4 European Union during2015-2020 [41].
protocol is used for Low-Rate Wireless Private Area Networks 3.2.4 Application abstraction- provides an interface to interact
(LR-WPAN) [30]. A classification of IoT protocols along with with devices. The interface with a device can be implemented by
their specifications can be found in [4]. query language.
From IoT perspective, wireless sensor nodes and network should Table 2. Communication technologies in IoT
address three limiting factors for their wide acceptance. At
first,heterogeneous devices must be supported. In spite of
Communicatio Transmissio Transmissio Spectrum
significant development in embedded electronics and software n protocol n range n rate
[31], this factor remains burden for smart devices. The second
factor is associated with the requirement of battery in sensor RFID 50 cm/50 424 kbps 135 KHz/13.56
cm/3 m/1.5 MHz/960MHz/
nodes. In spite of many energy harvesting techniques [32,33]
m 2.4 GHz
including energy aware routing protocols [34,35] and deployment
Bluetooth 10 m 1 Mbps 2.4 GHz
techniques [36,37] being devised, timely replacement of batteries
WiFi 100 m 50 – 320 2.4/5.8 GHz
is still a limiting factor for widespread use. The third one relates
Mbps
to the electronics required IoT objects. Currently, considerable NFC 10 cm 100 kbps – 2.45 GHz
reduction in size brought by recent development in 10 Mbps
microelectronics is not enough to achieve full benefit of IoT. So, ZigBee 10 m 256 kbps/20 2.4 GHz/900
research in nanotechnology which is in infancy can contribute kbps MHz
much in extending scope and applicability of IoT in society [38]. Wi-Max 50 km 70 Mbps 2 – 11 MHz
UMTS/CDMA/ ̃ 2 Mbps 896MHz
3.2 MiddlewareTechnology EDGE
Lots of heterogeneous objects are expected to connect and IEEE 802.15.4 10 m 20/24/250 868/915/2400
kbps MHz
communicate in IoT. In order to hide the details of different
technologies a software layer is introduced between technological
layer and application layer. The SOA-based IoT architecture as

3
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Figure 2: Functional components of IoT middleware
TinyDB [42] is a middleware which providesquery language
forend users to know different parameters fromsensors. The
middleware for IoT has a number of service requirements
categorized as functional, non-functional, and architectural as
found in [44]. Functional requirements deal with discovery and
management of resource and data, non-functional requirements
manages scalability, reliability, availability, security and privacy
while architectural requirement is concerned about
interoperability, context-awareness, etc. Many types of
middleware solutions have been proposed for different functions
like context-awareness, adaptability and in various application
domains like WSN, RFID.
The existing middleware solutions are categorized into a
number of classes based on their design approaches as
summarized in Table 3. Event-based middleware such as RUNES
[45], Hermes [46] interact through events. They meet non-
functional requirements such as reliability, scalability, and
security.Service-oriented middleware develops applications based
on services. HYDRA [47], TinySOA [48], and SENSEI [49] are
examples of service-oriented middleware. Service-oriented
computing (SOC) is inspired by technology neutrality, service
reusability, service discoverability, and service composability.
However, it suffers from global syntax and semantics, scalability,
and security issues. Virtual Machine (VM)-based middleware
such as MagnetOS [50], Sensorware [51] provides a programming
environment by virtualizing infrastructures. In agent-based design,
applications are broken down into modules which are distributed
among mobile agents. Modulesmay be migratedto another agent
in order to support fault tolerance. Agilla [52], UbiROAD [53] are
among agent-based middleware solutions. HYDRA [47],
UBIWARE provide context awareness. Tuple-space middleware
like LIME [54], TS-Mid [55] allow applications to communicate
by sharing data. A tuple-space is a data repository maintained by
each member of infrastructure. Database-oriented middleware
considers WSN as a virtual relational database system. Here,
SQL-like statements are used by applications to know sensor data.
Sensation, KSpot+ [56], IrisNet [57] are among database-oriented
middleware solutions for IoT. Application-driven middleware
such as MiLAN [58], AutoSec [59] are strongly coupled with a
specific applications. So, such middleware fails to support all IoT
middleware requirements mentioned above. At last, a comparison
4
A.Giri et al.
of IoT middleware solutions based on various features is given in
Table 4.
Middleware architectures [8], proposed in previous years are
mostly inspired by SOA-based IoT architecture as discussed
above. At present,itreveals that research effort is required towards
developing a generic middleware for IoT. Middleware
solutionslike ASPIRE, WHEREX, GSN, and UBIWARE have
lack of security and privacy. ASPIRE, UBIWARE, GSN do not
support interoperability.Context awareness is not supported by
SOCRADES, WHEREX, SIRENA, GSN, and ASPIRE. Only
few middleware solutions like HYDRA and UBIROAD support
all features. In the current scenario, most prominent research
problems which attract further research in this area include
dynamic resource discovery, scalability, security and privacy,
interoperability, embedded intelligence, and context-awareness.
4 APPLICATIONS AND SOCIAL IMPACT OF
IoT
There are a number of domains where IoTis being successfully
implemented. The potentialities of IoT can still be exploited to
develop new applications for the benefit of society.It can boost the
role of Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in our
daily lives.In the application environments of IoT, objects
communicate each other and represent a context perceived from
the environment. The potentiality of IoT can be exploited in many
domains like healthcare, transportation, environmental
monitoring, personal and social, smart city, industrial control and
many more. This section points out few promising applications
and their shortcomings.
4.1 Smart environment (homes, buildings, office,
plant)
Sensors and actuators deployed or attached with house hold
equipment like refrigerator, lighting, and air conditioners can
monitor the environment inside a house, plant or office.The
lighting system of a house may vary, like in the evening most of
the lights will be on while they will be off late at night. Based on
the reading of a temperature or a smoke detector sensor, a fire
alarm can be set off automatically. Such type of application is
very helpful for elderly people alone in home. Based on the
movement of occupants in home, some appliances like door in
room can be opened, lights be turned on at current room, water
points will be open at kitchen. Air conditions, refrigerators,
washing machines will now be IoT-enabled and controlled over
Internet in order to save energy. In near future, a smart
malfunctioning refrigerator will send a message to a service man
automatically without user’s intervention.Industrial automation is
improved by deploying RFID tags with products. Production
process is controlled to ensure quality of product by getting
different parameter values from sensors.IBM has launched Smart
Home solution [69], better known as “Stratecast” to provide
services to users allowing seamless communication among
various smart devices in house, like medical devices, computers,
mobiles, TVs, lighting, security or sound system. IBM is
collaborating with Verizon as a communication service provider
Internet of Things (IoT): A Survey on Architecture, Enabling
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Technologies, Applications and Challenges

(CSP) and Philips as a device vendor in order to implement the Table 3. Classification of middleware design approaches
architecture. Siemens, Cisco, Xerox, Microsoft, MIT and many
others are working in this domain. They have set nearly 20 home Middleware Type Examples
labs using more than 30 home appliances, five network protocols Event-based Hermes[46],RUNES[60],EMMA[61],G
and three Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques [70]. The Intel REEN[62]
smart home platform supports recognition of family members by Service-oriented Hydra[47],TinySOA[48],SENSEI[49]
voice or face and personalizes the home. Intel provides IoT VM approach MagnetOS[50],Sensorware[51],TinyV
solutions for smarter buildingto support personalization by M[63]
controlling over the office/living environment, mobility by Agent-based Smart
messages[64],Agilla[52],UbiROAD[53]
enabling managers to monitor property remotely and saving
Tuple-space LIME[54],TS-Mid[55],A3-TAG[65]
resources like energy, water. approach
Database approach COUGAR[66],Sensation[67],TinyDB[4
4.2 Healthcare 2],KSpot+[56]
Another impact area is healthcare [71–73] where IoT can be used Application- MiLAN[58],MidFusion[68],AutoSec[5
inmonitoring staff as well as patients and collecting patient’s data specific 9]
[74]. Real-time tracking of person or objects in motion is
performedin patient-flow monitoring.It helps to manage and Table 4. Comparison of middleware solutions [9]
deploy staff. Suitable authentication technique can secure the
patients and help to avoid mistakes like wrong drug/dose/time. IoT Features of Middleware
middleware

Interoperability
Automatic collection of clinical data must be enabled so as to

management

Security and
Portability

awareness
enrich medical inventory. Real-time monitoring of patients is

Context

privacy
Device
possible by attaching different sensors to measure body
temperature, blood pressure, heart response. These IoT-enabled
sensors can detect abnormality locally and in no time, send this
information to physicist. A community health service [75] has HYDRA √ √ √ √ √
already been proposed with three-layer architecture to monitor the ASPIRE x √ √ x x
healthcare remotely from hospital.This application can prevent UBIWARE x √ √ √ x
hospitals from overcrowding. Analyzing patient’s data doctors can UBIROAD √ √ √ √ √
GSN x √ √ x √
send advice through text/video/voice/email. The limitation of such
SIRENA √ √ √ x √
application is that there is no security and privacy of patient’s SOCRADES √ √ √ x √
data.Timely delivery of accurate response to criticalpatientisother WHEREX √ √ √ x x
challenge in this domain another challenge in this domain. The
IoT-based application powered by artificial intelligence, called CHI promotes education and amusement to hospital children. The
ambient assisted living (AAL) [76,77] can assist elderly work in [87] proposes an m-health that can be used to develop a
individual in his or her residence in a convenient and safe manner. good nutritional habit among children. The potentiality of medical
Authors in [78] discuss security aspect of such application. The semantics and ontologies in providing huge medical information
m-IoT promotes a mobile computing platform to provide and knowledge influences IoT-based healthcare applications.
healthcare services. In [73], authors describe eHealth, IoT policies Semantic Medical Access (SMA) is proposed in [88] for medical
and regulations in accessing healthcare services. Pulse oximetry is monitoring service. To analyze large medical data stored in cloud
noninvasive nonstop monitoring of oxygen saturation in blood. medical rule engines may be employed in healthcare.
IoT-based pulse oximetry is an integrated approach used in In spite of its immense benefit to wellness of people, it throws
CoAP-based healthcare services [81], and remote patient a number of challenges. As health data is highly sensitive, if
monitoring [82]. However, implementing IoT technology in this misused can deteriorate relation and destroy reputation among
domain has many challenges. Context-awareness and m-IoT individuals. Enforcement of policies and regulations in promoting
ecosystem are two prominent challenges in this area [79]. IoT-based health care services is needed for its wide acceptance.
IoT is applied in electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring to provide In [73], authors address eHealth policies and regulations across
maximum information in real-time [83]. Researches have been the world in accessing healthcare services and provide open issues
done towards full automation of smart wheelchair based on IoT and challenges in IoT-based health care. Many countries like
[84] for disabled people. Intel developed a connected wheelchair Japan, France, China, and India have already announced eHealth
which results into a connected machines [85]. Awareness around policies. Data centers must be capable of handling of streaming
children’s health [86] in monitoring emotional, behavioral, and and digitizing large volume health data. Without proper security
mental health is exercised by a IoT service named Children Health of such data there is a risk of cyber-attack. But implementing
Information (CHI). security measures in healthcare is constrained by the
computational, energy, and memory limitation. As healthcare

5
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom A.Giri et al.

devices are mobile in nature, devising security algorithm for 4.5 Personal and social
healthcare is challenging. Moreover, no interface standards exist
Atzori et al. [11] proposed a “Social Internet of Things (SIoT)”
for devices. It raises the interoperability issue in IoT. Immediate
that describes a network of intelligent things around us. SIoT
effort is needed towards standardization of such issues.
helps individual to interact with other and maintain social
relationship [98]. Twitter, Facebook [99] are web portals through
4.3 Smart cities
which people remain in touch with friends by getting and posting
‘Smart Cities’ refers to the cyber-physical ecosystem empowered real-time updates. Tracking of IoT-enabled objects against losses
by advanced ICT to provide facilities to the inhabitants of a city or thefts is possible by developing applications. For example,
[89][90]. Use of IoT in smart city optimizes usage of physical smart objects such as laptops, mobiles will send SMS
resources like power grid, water, parking space, etc. in cities automatically to its owner on reaching a new location or
[91,92] like Glasgow, Barcelona, Masdar, etc.. Traffic monitoring unauthorized access.Many companies have implemented SIoT for
is possible in cities and traffic diversion is made accordingly to their products for collecting data from users. These data are
avoid congestion. Smart parking facility is made available to collected from social networks and analyzed to provide solution
smart cars through RFID and sensors technology to find out [100].
currently available parking space nearby in city [93]. Using IoT In SIoT, research must address issues like interoperability,
sensors can send air pollution data such as amount of carbon- device management, security and privacy, fault tolerance, and
dioxide, etc. to an agency. A Smart City Platformisdeveloped to heterogeneity.
smart waste management in a European city [94]. Sensor data can
be used to detect violator of traffic rules and to analyze the 4.6 Agriculture
accident scenarios. Another important application of IoT that can
Agriculture is one of the emerging fields for implementing IoT
be provided to citizens is to monitor water flowing towards good
[101–103]. If IoT can be implemented in third world countries
quality drinking water. In order to ensure high quality of water,
like India, Bangladesh, Brazil where agriculture is the main
different sensors are placed at critical cornersof the city. This
profession then human effort can be used optimally. In [103],
technique eventually detects accidental contamination of drinking
authors proposed a framework called AgriTech towards
water, rain water, and sewage disposal. Smart grid and smart
agricultural automation. Deploying sensors like humidity,
metering are now popular in many cities to ensure efficient energy
nutrients and getting data from the field of agriculture farmers can
consumption [95]. Smart meters monitor energy consumption in
save their time. The excess human effort can be used for the
house. Similarly, citywide electricity consumption pattern helps to
industrialization in these countries. The potential impact of IoT
ensure uninterrupted electricity. The sensors used in smart cities
may be exploited in agriculture by minimizing wastage of
are vulnerable to physical as well as cyber attacks. What will
resources like water. Different sensors are deployed in field for
happen if a smart meter is tampered? Associating authentication
sensing moisture, temperature, soil nutrients. Based on
to a particular smart meter to avoid anonymous meter readings is
information from these sensors the amount of water, fertilizers or
difficult now. The data communication in smart city mustbe
insecticides is determined. This technique reduces the cost of
secured against such attacks.
cultivation.
However, implementing IoT in agriculture is challenging due
4.4 Transportation and logistics
to initial setup cost. The sensors in crop field are prone to physical
IoT is used heavily in intelligent transport systems and attack. Again, careless deployment of sensors generates unwanted
autonomous vehicles. Embedded sensors in trains, buses, cars can information from field not belonging to the farmer.
helpdrivers for better monitoring and managementfor the safety
passengers. Transported goods attached with RFID tags can be 4.7 Pharmaceutical industry
monitored and the status of delivery could be enquired through
Safety and security of pharmaceutical products are of utmost
IoT. RFID and NFC provide wide market opportunity in the
important. In this view smart labels are attached to drugs for
domain of supply chain management, transportation, inventory
monitoring their status while being transported and stored.
management, mobile ticketing.Intel in collaboration with BMW
Patients are directly benefitted from smart labels on drugs by
group and computer vision leader, Mobileye is working towards
knowing expiry, authentication, and dosages of medicines.
realizing the next generation platform for automated driving [96].
Counterfeiting [104] in this area can be stopped by IoT. Smart
Cars are embedded with sensors which can generate 360 degree of
medicine cabinet also helps patients to track timely delivery of
data. Intel processors transform the data into actionable insight to
medicines. In [105], authors present an IoT-based pharmaceutical
assist and/or automated driving. By 2020, self-driving is expected
intelligent information system helps medical practitioners to
to have traffic signal recognition, emergency braking, pedestrian
detect side effects of different drugs on patients.
detection, park assistance, cross traffic alert and many more.
In any IoT system, huge amount of data transactions will take
Providing security for the connected cars and instant driving
place. Some decisions and control signals or suggestions will be
assistance is essential for safer, more productive and enjoyable
sent to the application. For ensuring security of those data,
travel. An intelligent monitoring system for refrigerator trucks is
proposed in [97] to ensure delivery of goods in good condition.

6
Internet of Things (IoT): A Survey on Architecture, Enabling
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
Technologies, Applications and Challenges

messages of suggestion and control signal, a strong and efficient major research challenges. In each of the issues, the problem that
authentication protocol will be needed. IoT system may face is also identified.
5 IoT INITIATIVES
6.1 Massive Scaling
A number of IoT initiatives are taken by many countries like US,
Europe, China, Japan, Korea, and others. Here, we mention the Trillions of things will join the internet for making a massive IoT.
most relevant ones. All initiatives are classified in two main Identification, addressing, authentication, securing, and accessing
categories- related projects and standardization activities. In order services of such huge network of things are major challenges in
to support wide range of applications across industries, IoT paradigm. Trillions of things will generate enormous data in a
individuals, societies and environment IoT need some standards. moment, how to handle such Bigdata? Is IPv6
As of now, various bodies put their efforts towards sufficient to address those things? Will 6LoWPAN act as a
standardization. This section gives a summary of related projects protocol for future Internet? Can the need for battery be
and standardization activities with regard to IoT paradigm. eliminated with sufficiently low power circuits? Which single
orunified architecture willprovide interoperability of
5.1 Related projects heterogeneous devices supporting diverse applications? These are
some of the questions that readily pop up in the minds of the
Over the years, a number of IoT projects are active in Europe,
researchers.
Japan, US, China and other countries. Especially in Europe,
numerous projects have been funded to conduct research on
6.2 Security and Privacy
certain aspects of Internet of Things. Among the key players in
IoT initiatives is European Commission which allotted funds for Preserving security and privacy in IoT is a challenge in IoT
several projects like HYDRA [47], RUNES [60], IoT-A and [113]. Due to inherent openness in IoT, things are vulnerable to
iCORE [106], IoT6 [107], IoTivity [108]. A state-of-the-art of Internet attacks such as application attack. In spite of these attacks
such projects is given in Table 5. IoT applications must be able to perform its operation to the
user’s satisfaction. So, techniques for detecting and mitigating
5.2 Standardization activities attacks are to be developed to cope with the situation. For
example, eavesdropping in RFID system can be avoided by
Many Standards Developing Organizations (SDOs) have been
encryption. However, implementation of security techniques in
formed to develop standards in IoT to facilitate providers and
IoT is challenging because of minimal capacity of things, physical
application developers for simplifying and smoothing IoT
inaccessibility to sensors, actuators, or objects, lack of powerful
solutions. In Table 6, a summary of most relevant standardsis
wireless communication.
presented. Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) contributed
many communication standards for physical layer, MAC layer Table 5.IoT-related projects
specifically, Constrained Application Protocol (CoAP), Routing
Protocol for Low Power and Lossy Networks(RPL) [109], IPv6 Project Source
over Low-Power Wireless Personal Area Network(6LoWPAN) HYDRA[47] www.hydramiddleware.edu
[19]. RFID standards [15] are developed by EPCglobal. In [6],
authors provide a survey on protocol stack developed by IETF for RUNES[45] www.ist-runes.org
IoT. The M2M group of ETSI is responsible for developing
standards for M2M systems and sensor networks.But there is little IoT-A www.iot-a.edu
standardization done towards IoT. More standardization effort is
required in QoS, charging, management, application, and e-Japan http://japan.kantei.go.jp/it/netw
strategy[111] ork/0122full_e.html
hardware interfaces [110].
From the current scenario, it is obvious that integrated effort is iCORE[106] www.iot-icore.edu
required towards development of a comprehensive SENSEI[49] http://www.ict-
framework.More research is needed in developing standardsin sensei.org/index.php
data formats,data models, andservice-level interfacesand protocols
for application-layer interfaces.Academic and industrial research IoT6[107] http://www.iot6.eu
should work together towards achieving a reliable, efficient and IoTivity[108] https://www.iotivity.org
practical communication system. Alljoyn[112] https://allseenalliance.org

6 CHALLENGES AND RESEARCH

DIRECTIONS
IoT is facing challenges to ensure scalability, interoperability,
openness, security and privacy. This section points out some of
As the devices lack computational resources development of
lightweight efficient security techniques are of great interest
[114]. Cryptography plays a major role in securing network
infrastructure. Although standards such as AES might work well
for some IoT devices; it has limited use in other devices such as

7
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
RFID tags due to resource constraints. They must be designed
efficiently without compromising security. Much of the data
collected and communicated in IoT pertains to personal
information. Preserving privacy of the most sensitive data in IoT
has utmost need. Data is vulnerable to attacks due to IoT’s
anywhere, anything, anytime nature.
Without proper privacy measure, users would have access to
information not meant for all. Users must be provided with tools
to manage their own data like sharing a part or all of their
personal data available in social networking sites. To ensure that
unauthorized use of data doesn’t happen, identity management is
also required.
So, social acceptability of IoT-based applications depends on
privacy, anonymity, liability and trust. State-of-the-art of security
mechanisms to protect communications in IoT could be found in
[113-116].
6.3 Interoperability
Interoperability among heterogeneous devices is another
challenge for IoT. This issue must be addressed not only by
application developers but also by device manufacturers. Every
IoT service must be designed so as to address interoperability
issue in order to meet customer’s requirements. Interoperation
among devices is possible through defining several APIs. APIs
defined in middleware performs for syntactic or semantic
interoperation. Syntactic interoperation takes care of format of the
information while semantic interoperation looks into meaning of
the exchanged information.
6.4 Bigdata and its management
Bigdata is the voluminous and complicated data collected from
heterogeneous sources [117]. Enormous data is created,
communicated and stored in IoT systems every moment
producing Bigdata. Real power of IoT lies in collecting and
analyzing such data. Interpretation of such noisy, uncertain data
and developing new inference techniques are the key challenges.
For example, raw data sensed by sensors deployed in a body must
be converted to semantically meaningful informationso that it is
able to tell about a patient’s depression, or respiratory disorder, or
eating habits, and so on. Data mining techniques are expected to
be capable of creating knowledge from Bigdata in IoT. Current
data mining techniques are centralizedin nature, which makes it
unsuitable for IoT. A comprehensive survey on IoT data mining
technique including classification, clustering, pattern mining and
knowledge discovery in database (KDD) is done in [118]. Outlier
detection performed by concurrent processing of multiple data
streams is studied in [119]. Although Bigdata analytics platforms
are provided by Apache Hadoop [120] and SciDB [121], they are
not fit for Bigdata in IoT. Apache Spark [122] and Apache Strom
[123] are examples of open source software.
Generally, Bigdata“3Vs” model [124] stands for volume,
velocity, and variety. Volume means increasing generation and
collection of data, velocity means rapid and timely collection and
analysis of data, and variety means various types (structured,
semi-structured or unstructured) of data. Different data processing
8
A.Giri et al.
approaches are initiated considering their combinations. In [125],
a framework called Lambda Architecture is proposed that handles
Bigdata processing for multiple applications.
Bigdata applications face a number of challenges in data
representation, redundancy reduction, and data confidentiality
[126]. IoT generates data sets which are heterogeneous in types,
structures, semantics, granularity, organizations and accessibility.
Efficient data representation techniques are needed for better
interpretation and analysis on such databases.Efficient format
conversion methods should be developed to enrich quality of data.
Redundancy in datasets is to be reduced to reduce the cost of
maintenance and analysis of data. In WSN, redundancy of data
and energy consumption are reduced by data aggregation. Bigdata
may contain sensitive data like credit card number, transactional
data, or other personal data. Data encryption is also challenging in
Bigdata due to the 3Vs. At present, Bigdata service providers have
not adopted any security measures. They even share data with
third party without enforcing proper security measures. That
creates potential risk to sensitive data.Efficient cryptography
algorithms are to be developed for this purpose.
6.5 Standardization
Heterogonous devices will join IoT and hence, without standards,
services may not be accessible to others. In Section 5.2, most
promising standardsdeveloped by European Commission, IETF,
ETSI, IEEE, and EPCglobal are mentioned. 6LoWPAN [19] was
developed by IETF to make IPv6 compatible for low power
devices. More research is needed in 6LoWPAN to get complete
solution in IoT. The routing protocolRPL developed by IETF is
for low power lossy networks. There is little standardization done
towards IoT by M2M working group of ETSI.RFID standards
[15] are developed by EPCglobal. But more contribution is
required in security [21], connecting RFID with IPv6 [20]. At
present, these are not enough to provide better interoperability for
all devices and sensors. More standardization effort is required in
QoS, charging, management, application, and hardware interfaces
[110]. With regard to architecture, no unified architectural model
is developed for IoT applications. Most of the architectures
defined by projects like SENSEIand Internet of Things-
Architecture (IoT-A) address challenges particularly from WSN
perspective.Other architectures should be developed for different
application domains. Industries, Standardization Institutes, world-
wide bodies, and other Alliances should work together towards
achieving a common IoT standard.
7. CONCLUSIONS
The IoT is rapidly changing our lifestyle through the use of smart
connected things. New IoT applications, called humans-in-the-
loop will manifest themselves in more sophistication where
human beings and things will collaborate closely. Although
involving humans in the loop closely in collaboration with objects
has immense advantages, modeling human behavior is extremely
challenging due to complex physiological, psychological and
behavioral aspects of the human being. Massive scaling, inherent
Internet of Things (IoT): A Survey on Architecture, Enabling
Technologies, Applications and Challenges
openness, security and privacy demand researchers to contribute
in IoT. Coordinated effort is needed by industries, researchers,
providers, and application developers to make IoT successful.
This paper provides enabling technologies of IoT along with
their challenges. Some representative novel applications of IoT
also discussed briefly along with their limitations. State-of-the-art
of IoT initiatives and standards made by different countries has
been summarized in tabular form. Middleware solutions are also
discussed in this research. We also pointed out major challenges
which need to be addressed in coming years. Although, current
enabling technologies make IoT feasible, they are not in a position
to address scalability and performance requirements for future
IoT. Uniform common architecture and related standards need to
be developed to address scalability and heterogeneity. Due to
inherent openness, security and privacy remain major challenge in
IoT. Design of lightweight security methods can secure IoT.
Research towards addressing the challenges can help achieving
better future IoT.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Gantz and D. Reinsel, “The digital universe in 2020: Big data,
bigger digital shadows, and biggest growth in the far east,” IDC
iView IDC Anal. Futur., vol. 2007, no. 2012, pp. 1–16, 2012.
[2] J. Manyika, M. Chui, J. Bughin, R. Dobbs, P. Bisson, and A. Marrs,
Disruptive technologies: Advances that will transform life, business,
and the global economy, vol. 180. McKinsey Global Institute San
Francisco, CA, 2013.
[3] M. Wu, T.-J. Lu, F.-Y. Ling, J. Sun, and H.-Y. Du, “Research on the
architecture of Internet of things,” in 2010 3rd International
Conference on Advanced Computer Theory and Engineering
(ICACTE), 2010, vol. 5, pp. V5–484.
[4] A. Al-Fuqaha, M. Guizani, M. Mohammadi, M. Aledhari, and M.
Ayyash, “Internet of Things: A Survey on Enabling Technologies,
Protocols, and Applications,” IEEE Communications Surveys &
Tutorials, vol. 17, no. 4. pp. 2347–2376, 2015.
[5] P. Suresh, J. V. Daniel, V. Parthasarathy, and R. H. Aswathy, “A
state of the art review on the Internet of Things (IoT) history,
technology and fields of deployment,” in Science Engineering and
Management Research (ICSEMR), 2014 International Conference
on, 2014, pp. 1–8.
[6] Z. Sheng, S. Yang, Y. Yu, A. Vasilakos, J. Mccann, and K. Leung,
“A survey on the ietf protocol suite for the internet of things:
Standards, challenges, and opportunities,” IEEE Wirel. Commun.,
vol. 20, no. 6, pp. 91–98, 2013.
[7] I. F. Akyildiz, W. Su, Y. Sankarasubramaniam, and E. Cayirci,
“Wireless Sensor Networks: A Survey,” Comput. Netw., vol. 38, no.
4, pp. 393–422, Mar. 2002.
[8] M. A. Razzaque, M. Milojevic-Jevric, A. Palade, and S. Clarke,
“Middleware for internet of things: a survey,” IEEE Internet Things
J., vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 70–95, 2016.
[9] S. Bandyopadhyay, M. Sengupta, S. Maiti, and S. Dutta, “Role of
middleware for internet of things: A study,” Int. J. Comput. Sci. Eng.
Surv., vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 94–105, 2011.
[10] S. N. Han, I. Khan, G. M. Lee, N. Crespi, and R. H. Glitho, “Service
composition for IP smart object using realtime Web protocols:
Concept and research challenges,” Comput. Stand. Interfaces, vol.
43, pp. 79–90, 2016.
[11] L. Atzori, A. Iera, and G. Morabito, “SIoT: Giving a Social Structure
to the Internet of Things,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 15,
no. 11. pp. 1193–1195, 2011.
[12] R. Khan, S. U. Khan, R. Zaheer, and S. Khan, “Future internet: the
internet of things architecture, possible applications and key
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
challenges,” in Frontiers of Information Technology (FIT), 2012
10th International Conference on, 2012, pp. 257–260.
[13] L. Atzori, A. Iera, and G. Morabito, “The Internet of Things: A
survey,” Comput. Networks, vol. 54, no. 15, pp. 2787–2805, 2010.
[14] Z. Yang, Y. Yue, Y. Yang, Y. Peng, X. Wang, and W. Liu, “Study
and application on the architecture and key technologies for IOT,” in
Multimedia Technology (ICMT), 2011 International Conference on,
2011, pp. 747–751.
[15] X. Jia, Q. Feng, T. Fan, and Q. Lei, “RFID technology and its
applications in Internet of Things (IoT),” Consumer Electronics,
Communications and Networks (CECNet), 2012 2nd International
Conference on. pp. 1282–1285, 2012.
[16] G. M. Lee, N. Crespi, J. K. Choi, and M. Boussard, “Internet of
things,” in Evolution of Telecommunication Services, Springer, 2013,
pp. 257–282.
[17] L. Da Xu, W. He, and S. Li, “Internet of things in industries: A
survey,” IEEE Trans. Ind. informatics, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 2233–
2243, 2014.
[18] N. Koshizuka and K. Sakamura, “Ubiquitous ID: standards for
ubiquitous computing and the Internet of Things,” IEEE Pervasive
Comput., vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 98–101, 2010.
[19] N. Kushalnagar, G. Montenegro, and C. Schumacher, “IPv6 over
low-power wireless personal area networks (6LoWPANs): overview,
assumptions, problem statement, and goals,” RFC 4919
(Informational), Internet Engineering Task Force, 2007.
[20] G. Roussos and V. Kostakos, “rfid in pervasive computing: State-of-
the-art and outlook,” Pervasive Mob. Comput., vol. 5, no. 1, pp.
110–131, Feb. 2009.
[21] A. Juels, “RFID security and privacy: A research survey,” Sel. Areas
Commun. IEEE J., vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 381–394, 2006.
[22] E. Ferro and F. Potorti, “Bluetooth and Wi-Fi wireless protocols: a
survey and a comparison,” IEEE Wirel. Commun., vol. 12, no. 1, pp.
12–26, 2005.
[23] R. Want, “Near field communication,” IEEE Pervasive Comput.,
vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 4–7, 2011.
[24] P. McDermott-Wells, “What is bluetooth?,” IEEE potentials, vol. 23,
no. 5, pp. 33–35, 2004.
[25] Z. Shelby, K. Hartke, and C. Bormann, “The constrained application
protocol (CoAP),” 2014.
[26] C. Bormann, A. P. Castellani, and Z. Shelby, “Coap: An application
protocol for billions of tiny internet nodes,” IEEE Internet Comput.,
vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 62–67, 2012.
[27] D. Locke, “Mq telemetry transport (mqtt) v3. 1 protocol
specification,” IBM Dev. Tech. Libr., 2010.
[28] P. Saint-Andre, “Extensible messaging and presence protocol
(XMPP): Core,” Internet Eng. Task Force (IETF), Fremont, CA,
USA, Req. Comments 6120, 2011.
[29] A. J. Jara, P. Martinez-Julia, and A. Skarmeta, “Light-weight
multicast DNS and DNS-SD (lmDNS-SD): IPv6-based resource and
service discovery for the Web of Things,” in innovative mobile and
internet services in ubiquitous computing (IMIS), 2012 sixth
international conference on, 2012, pp. 731–738.
[30] I. 802 W. Group, “IEEE Standard for Local and Metropolitan Area
Networks—Part 15.4: Low-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks
(LR-WPANs),” IEEE Std, vol. 802, pp. 4–2011, 2011.
[31] M. Durvy, J. Abeillé, P. Wetterwald, C. O’Flynn, B. Leverett, E.
Gnoske, M. Vidales, G. Mulligan, N. Tsiftes, and N. Finne, “Making
sensor networks IPv6 ready,” in Proceedings of the 6th ACM
conference on Embedded network sensor systems, 2008, pp. 421–
422.
[32] V. Raghunathan, S. Ganeriwal, and M. Srivastava, “Emerging
techniques for long lived wireless sensor networks,” IEEE Commun.
Mag., vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 108–114, 2006.
[33] D. Niyato, E. Hossain, M. M. Rashid, and V. K. Bhargava, “Wireless
sensor networks with energy harvesting technologies: A game-
theoretic approach to optimal energy management,” IEEE Wirel.
Commun., vol. 14, no. 4, 2007.
9
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
[34] N. A. Pantazis, S. A. Nikolidakis, and D. D. Vergados, “Energy-
Efficient Routing Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks: A
Survey,” IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 15, no. 2.
pp. 551–591, 2013.
[35] K. Akkaya and M. Younis, “An energy-aware QoS routing protocol
for wireless sensor networks,” in Distributed Computing Systems
Workshops, 2003. Proceedings. 23rd International Conference on,
2003, pp. 710–715.
[36] M. Younis and K. Akkaya, “Strategies and techniques for node
placement in wireless sensor networks: A survey,” Ad Hoc
Networks, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 621–655, 2008.
[37] X. Wu, G. Chen, and S. K. Das, “Avoiding energy holes in wireless
sensor networks with nonuniform node distribution,” IEEE Trans.
Parallel Distrib. Syst., vol. 19, no. 5, pp. 710–720, 2008.
[38] I. F. Akyildiz, F. Brunetti, and C. Blázquez, “Nanonetworks: A new
communication paradigm,” Comput. Networks, vol. 52, no. 12, pp.
2260–2279, 2008.
[39] H. Ning and Z. Wang, “Future Internet of Things Architecture: Like
Mankind Neural System or Social Organization Framework?,” IEEE
Communications Letters, vol. 15, no. 4. pp. 461–463, 2011.
[40] S. Wang, Z. Zhang, Z. Ye, X. Wang, X. Lin, and S. Chen,
“Application of environmental internet of things on water quality
management of urban scenic river,” Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol.,
vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 216–222, 2013.
[41] O. Vermesan, P. Friess, P. Guillemin, S. Gusmeroli, H. Sundmaeker,
A. Bassi, I. S. Jubert, M. Mazura, M. Harrison, and M. Eisenhauer,
“Internet of things strategic research roadmap,” Internet Things-
Global Technol. Soc. Trends, vol. 1, pp. 9–52, 2011.
[42] S. R. Madden, M. J. Franklin, J. M. Hellerstein, and W. Hong,
“TinyDB: an acquisitional query processing system for sensor
networks,” ACM Trans. database Syst., vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 122–173,
2005.
[43] A. Malatras, A. Asgari, and T. Baugé, “Web enabled wireless sensor
networks for facilities management,” IEEE Syst. J., vol. 2, no. 4, pp.
500–512, 2008.
[44] K. E. Kjær, “A survey of context-aware middleware,” in
Proceedings of the 25th conference on IASTED International Multi-
Conference: Software Engineering, 2007, pp. 148–155.
[45] P. Costa, G. Coulson, C. Mascolo, G. P. Picco, and S. Zachariadis,
“The RUNES middleware: a reconfigurable component-based
approach to networked embedded systems,” 2005 IEEE 16th
International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio
Communications, vol. 2. pp. 806–810 Vol. 2, 2005.
[46] P. R. Pietzuch, “Hermes: A scalable event-based middleware,”
University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory, 2004.
[47] M. Eisenhauer, P. Rosengren, and P. Antolin, “Hydra: A
development platform for integrating wireless devices and sensors
into ambient intelligence systems,” in The Internet of Things,
Springer, 2010, pp. 367–373.
[48] E. Avilés-López and J. A. García-Macías, “TinySOA: a service-
oriented architecture for wireless sensor networks,” Serv. Oriented
Comput. Appl., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 99–108, 2009.
[49] V. Tsiatsis, “The SENSEI real world internet architecture,” 2010.
[50] C. M. Kirsch, M. A. A. Sanvido, and T. A. Henzinger, “A
programmable microkernel for real-time systems,” in Proceedings of
the 1st ACM/USENIX international conference on Virtual execution
environments, 2005, pp. 35–45.
[51] A. Boulis, C.-C. Han, R. Shea, and M. B. Srivastava, “SensorWare:
Programming sensor networks beyond code update and querying,”
Pervasive Mob. Comput., vol. 3, no. 4, pp. 386–412, 2007.
[52] C.-L. Fok, G.-C. Roman, and C. Lu, “Agilla: A mobile agent
middleware for self-adaptive wireless sensor networks,” ACM Trans.
Auton. Adapt. Syst., vol. 4, no. 3, p. 16, 2009.
[53] V. Terziyan, O. Kaykova, and D. Zhovtobryukh, “Ubiroad: Semantic
middleware for context-aware smart road environments,” in Internet
and web applications and services (iciw), 2010 fifth international
conference on, 2010, pp. 295–302.
[54] A. L. Murphy, G. Pietro Picco, and G.-C. Roman, “Lime: A
middleware for physical and logical mobility,” in Distributed
10
A.Giri et al.
Computing Systems, 2001. 21st International Conference on., 2001,
pp. 524–533.
[55] R. de C. A. Lima, N. S. Rosa, and I. R. L. Marques, “TS-Mid:
Middleware for wireless sensor networks based on tuple space,” in
Advanced Information Networking and Applications-Workshops,
2008. AINAW 2008. 22nd International Conference on, 2008, pp.
886–891.
[56] P. Andreou, D. Zeinalipour-Yazti, M. Vassiliadou, P. K.
Chrysanthis, and G. Samaras, “Kspot: Effectively monitoring the k
most important events in a wireless sensor network,” in Data
Engineering, 2009. ICDE’09. IEEE 25th International Conference
on, 2009, pp. 1503–1506.
[57] P. B. Gibbons, B. Karp, Y. Ke, S. Nath, and S. Seshan, “Irisnet: An
architecture for a worldwide sensor web,” IEEE pervasive Comput.,
vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 22–33, 2003.
[58] W. B. Heinzelman, A. L. Murphy, H. S. Carvalho, and M. A. Perillo,
“Middleware to support sensor network applications,” IEEE Netw.,
vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 6–14, 2004.
[59] Q. Han and N. Venkatasubramanian, “Autosec: An integrated
middleware framework for dynamic service brokering,” IEEE
Distrib. Syst. online, vol. 2, no. 7, pp. 22–31, 2001.
[60] P. Costa, G. Coulson, R. Gold, M. Lad, C. Mascolo, L. Mottola, G.
Pietro Picco, T. Sivaharan, N. Weerasinghe, and S. Zachariadis,
“The RUNES middleware for networked embedded systems and its
application in a disaster management scenario,” in Pervasive
Computing and Communications, 2007. PerCom’07. Fifth Annual
IEEE International Conference on, 2007, pp. 69–78.
[61] M. Musolesi, C. Mascolo, and S. Hailes, “Emma: Epidemic
messaging middleware for ad hoc networks,” Pers. Ubiquitous
Comput., vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 28–36, 2006.
[62] T. Sivaharan, G. Blair, and G. Coulson, “Green: A configurable and
re-configurable publish-subscribe middleware for pervasive
computing,” in OTM Confederated International Conferences“ On
the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems,” 2005, pp. 732–749.
[63] K. Hong, J. Park, S. Kim, T. Kim, H. Kim, B. Burgstaller, and B.
Scholz, “TinyVM: an energy efficient execution infrastructure for
sensor networks,” Softw. Pract. Exp., vol. 42, no. 10, pp. 1193–1209,
2012.
[64] P. Kang, C. Borcea, G. Xu, A. Saxena, U. Kremer, and L. Iftode,
“Smart messages: A distributed computing platform for networks of
embedded systems,” Comput. J., vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 475–494, 2004.
[65] L. Baresi, S. Guinea, and P. Saeedi, “Achieving self-adaptation
through dynamic group management,” in Assurances for Self-
Adaptive Systems, Springer, 2013, pp. 214–239.
[66] P. Bonnet, J. Gehrke, and P. Seshadri, “Towards sensor database
systems,” in International Conference on Mobile Data Management,
2001, pp. 3–14.
[67] T. Hasiotis, G. Alyfantis, V. Tsetsos, O. Sekkas, and S.
Hadjiefthymiades, “Sensation: A middleware integration platform
for pervasive applications in wireless sensor networks,” in Wireless
Sensor Networks, 2005. Proceeedings of the Second European
Workshop on, 2005, pp. 366–377.
[68] H. Alex, M. Kumar, and B. Shirazi, “MidFusion: An adaptive
middleware for information fusion in sensor network applications,”
Inf. Fusion, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 332–343, 2008.
[69] M. Jude, “IBM: Working Towards a Smarter Connected Home.
Internet: http://docs.caba.org/documents/IBM-Smart-Cloud-Home-
SPIE2012.pdf,” 2014.
[70] L. Jiang, D.-Y. Liu, and B. Yang, “Smart home research,”
Proceedings of 2004 International Conference on Machine Learning
and Cybernetics (IEEE Cat. No.04EX826), vol. 2. pp. 659–663 vol.2,
2004.
[71] N. Bui and M. Zorzi, “Health care applications: a solution based on
the internet of things,” in Proceedings of the 4th International
Symposium on Applied Sciences in Biomedical and Communication
Technologies, 2011, p. 131.
[72] A.-M. Rahmani, N. K. Thanigaivelan, T. N. Gia, J. Granados, B.
Negash, P. Liljeberg, and H. Tenhunen, “Smart e-health gateway:
Bringing intelligence to internet-of-things based ubiquitous
Internet of Things (IoT): A Survey on Architecture, Enabling
Technologies, Applications and Challenges
healthcare systems,” in Consumer Communications and Networking
Conference (CCNC), 2015 12th Annual IEEE, 2015, pp. 826–834.
[73] S. M. R. Islam, D. Kwak, M. D. H. Kabir, M. Hossain, and K.-S.
Kwak, “The internet of things for health care: a comprehensive
survey,” IEEE Access, vol. 3, pp. 678–708, 2015.
[74] A. M. Vilamovska, E. Hattziandreu, R. Schindler, C. Van Oranje, H.
De Vries, and J. Krapelse, “Rfid application in healthcare–scoping
and identifying areas for rfid deployment in healthcare delivery,”
RAND Eur. Febr., 2009.
[75] L. Lei-hong, H. Yue-shan, and W. Xiao-ming, “A Community
Health Service Architecture Based on the Internet of Things on
Health-Care,” in World Congress on Medical Physics and
Biomedical Engineering May 26-31, 2012, Beijing, China, 2013, pp.
1317–1320.
[76] A. Dohr, R. Modre-Opsrian, M. Drobics, D. Hayn, and G. Schreier,
“The internet of things for ambient assisted living,” in Information
technology: new generations (ITNG), 2010 seventh international
conference on, 2010, pp. 804–809.
[77] G. Acampora, D. J. Cook, P. Rashidi, and A. V Vasilakos, “A survey
on ambient intelligence in healthcare,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 101, no. 12,
pp. 2470–2494, 2013.
[78] M. S. Shahamabadi, B. B. M. Ali, P. Varahram, and A. J. Jara, “A
network mobility solution based on 6LoWPAN hospital wireless
sensor network (NEMO-HWSN),” in Innovative Mobile and Internet
Services in Ubiquitous Computing (IMIS), 2013 Seventh
International Conference on, 2013, pp. 433–438.
[79] R. S. H. Istepanian, S. Hu, N. Y. Philip, and A. Sungoor, “The
potential of Internet of m-health Things ‘m-IoT’ for non-invasive
glucose level sensing,” in Engineering in Medicine and Biology
Society, EMBC, 2011 Annual International Conference of the IEEE,
2011, pp. 5264–5266.
[80] Z. L. In, “Patient body temperature monitoring system and device
based on Internet of Things,” Chinese Pat., vol. 103, pp. 577–688,
2014.
[81] H. A. Khattak, M. Ruta, and E. Di Sciascio, “CoAP-based healthcare
sensor networks: A survey,” in Applied Sciences and Technology
(IBCAST), 2014 11th International Bhurban Conference on, 2014,
pp. 499–503.
[82] E. C. Larson, M. Goel, G. Boriello, S. Heltshe, M. Rosenfeld, and S.
N. Patel, “SpiroSmart: using a microphone to measure lung function
on a mobile phone,” in Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Conference on
Ubiquitous Computing, 2012, pp. 280–289.
[83] P. K. Dash, “Electrocardiogram monitoring,” Indian J. Anaesth, vol.
46, no. 4, pp. 251–260, 2002.
[84] L. Yang, Y. Ge, W. Li, W. Rao, and W. Shen, “A home mobile
healthcare system for wheelchair users,” in Computer Supported
Cooperative Work in Design (CSCWD), Proceedings of the 2014
IEEE 18th International Conference on, 2014, pp. 609–614.
[85] “Dr. Hawking’s Connected Wheelchair Project.” [Online].
Available: http://www.intel.co.kr/content/www/kr/ko/internet-of-
things/videos/drhawkings-. [Accessed: 08-Dec-2014].
[86] “Awareness Day 2014 Activities by Program Type.” [Online].
Available: http://www.samhsa.gov/sites/default/_les/children-
awareness-dayactivities-. [Accessed: 07-Dec-2014].
[87] M. Vazquez-Briseno, C. Navarro-Cota, J. I. Nieto-Hipolito, E.
Jimenez-Garcia, and J. D. Sanchez-Lopez, “A proposal for using the
internet of things concept to increase children’s health awareness,”
in Electrical Communications and Computers (CONIELECOMP),
2012 22nd International Conference on, 2012, pp. 168–172.
[88] G. Zhang, C. Li, Y. Zhang, C. Xing, and J. Yang, “SemanMedical: a
kind of semantic medical monitoring system model based on the IoT
sensors,” in e-Health Networking, Applications and Services
(Healthcom), 2012 IEEE 14th International Conference on, 2012,
pp. 238–243.
[89] D. Miorandi, S. Sicari, F. De Pellegrini, and I. Chlamtac, “Internet of
things: Vision, applications and research challenges,” Ad Hoc
Networks, vol. 10, no. 7, pp. 1497–1516, 2012.
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom
[90] A. Zanella, N. Bui, A. Castellani, L. Vangelista, and M. Zorzi,
“Internet of things for smart cities,” IEEE Internet Things J., vol. 1,
no. 1, pp. 22–32, 2014.
[91] T. Nam and T. A. Pardo, “Conceptualizing smart city with
dimensions of technology, people, and institutions,” in Proceedings
of the 12th annual international digital government research
conference: digital government innovation in challenging times,
2011, pp. 282–291.
[92] T. Bakıcı, E. Almirall, and J. Wareham, “A smart city initiative: the
case of Barcelona,” J. Knowl. Econ., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 135–148,
2013.
[93] H. Wang and W. He, “A reservation-based smart parking system,” in
Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS),
2011 IEEE Conference on, 2011, pp. 690–695.
[94] D. Bonino, M. T. D. Alizo, A. Alapetite, T. Gilbert, M. Axling, H.
Udsen, J. A. C. Soto, and M. Spirito, “Almanac: Internet of things
for smart cities,” in Future Internet of Things and Cloud (FiCloud),
2015 3rd International Conference on, 2015, pp. 309–316.
[95] M. Yun and B. Yuxin, “Research on the architecture and key
technology of Internet of Things (IoT) applied on smart grid,” in
Advances in Energy Engineering (ICAEE), 2010 International
Conference on, 2010, pp. 69–72.
[96] E. Qin, Y. Long, C. Zhang, and L. Huang, “Cloud computing and the
internet of things: Technology innovation in automobile service,” in
International Conference on Human Interface and the Management
of Information, 2013, pp. 173–180.
[97] Y. Zhang, B. Chen, and X. Lu, “Intelligent monitoring system on
refrigerator trucks based on the internet of things,” in International
Conference on Wireless Communications and Applications, 2011,
pp. 201–206.
[98] L. Atzori, A. Iera, G. Morabito, and M. Nitti, “The social internet of
things (siot)–when social networks meet the internet of things:
Concept, architecture and network characterization,” Comput.
networks, vol. 56, no. 16, pp. 3594–3608, 2012.
[99] J. Kleinberg, “The convergence of social and technological
networks,” Commun. ACM, vol. 51, no. 11, pp. 66–72, 2008.
[100] P. Semmelhack, Social machines: how to develop connected
products that change customers’ lives. John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
[101] Y. Bo and H. Wang, “The Application of Cloud Computing and the
Internet of Things in Agriculture and Forestry,” Service Sciences
(IJCSS), 2011 International Joint Conference on. pp. 168–172, 2011.
[102] J. Zhao, J. Zhang, Y. Feng, and J. Guo, “The study and application
of the IOT technology in agriculture,” Computer Science and
Information Technology (ICCSIT), 2010 3rd IEEE International
Conference on, vol. 2. pp. 462–465, 2010.
[103] A. Giri, S. Dutta, and S. Neogy, “Enabling agricultural automation to
optimize utilization of water, fertilizer and insecticides by
implementing Internet of Things (IoT),” 2016 International
Conference on Information Technology (InCITe) - The Next
Generation IT Summit on the Theme - Internet of Things: Connect
your Worlds. pp. 125–131, 2016.
[104] T. Kelesidis, I. Kelesidis, P. I. Rafailidis, and M. E. Falagas,
“Counterfeit or substandard antimicrobial drugs: a review of the
scientific evidence,” J. Antimicrob. Chemother., vol. 60, no. 2, pp.
214–236, 2007.
[105] A. J. Jara, A. F. Alcolea, M. A. Zamora, A. F. G. Skarmeta, and M.
Alsaedy, “Drugs interaction checker based on IoT,” in Internet of
Things (IOT), 2010, 2010, pp. 1–8.
[106] G. Baldini, R. V. Prasad, A. R. Biswas, K. Moessner, M. Etelapera,
J. P. Soininen, N. Septimiu-Cosmin, V. Stavroulaki, P. Vlacheas,
and A. Georgakopoulos, “A Cognitive Framework for Realizing and
Exploiting the Internet of Things Concept,” in 27th WWRF Meeting,
Dusseldorf, 2011.
[107] “IoT6 European research project, Deliverable D1.5:” [Online].
Available: http://www.iot6.eu. [Accessed: 08-Nov-2015].
[108] “IoTivity.” [Online]. Available: https://www.iotivity.org/.
[Accessed: 01-Jan-2015].
11
IML’17, October 2017, Liverpool, United Kingdom A.Giri et al.

[109] M. Weiser, “The computer for the 21st century.,” Mob. Comput.
Commun. Rev., vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 3–11, 1999.
[110] Z. Shelby, “ETSI M2M Standardization, March 16, 2009.” .
[111] I. T. S. Headquarters, “e-Japan strategy,” Retrieved June, vol. 22, p.
2004, 2001.
[112] “AllJoyn Framework.” [Online]. Available:
https://allseenalliance.org/. [Accessed: 13-Nov-2015].
[113] S. Sicari, A. Rizzardi, L. A. Grieco, and A. Coen-Porisini, “Security,
privacy and trust in Internet of Things: The road ahead,” Comput.
Networks, vol. 76, pp. 146–164, 2015.
[114] S. Raza, H. Shafagh, K. Hewage, R. Hummen, and T. Voigt, “Lithe:
Lightweight secure CoAP for the internet of things,” IEEE Sens. J.,
vol. 13, no. 10, pp. 3711–3720, 2013.
[115] G. Santucci, “Internet of the future and internet of things: what is at
stake and how are we getting prepared for them?, eMatch
conference,” Oslo, Sept., 2009.
[116] J. Granjal, E. Monteiro, and J. S. Silva, “Security for the internet of
things: a survey of existing protocols and open research issues,”
IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 1294–1312, 2015.
[117] X. Wu, X. Zhu, G.-Q. Wu, and W. Ding, “Data mining with big
data,” IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 97–107,
2014.
[118] C.-W. Tsai, C.-F. Lai, M.-C. Chiang, and L. T. Yang, “Data mining
for Internet of Things: A survey.,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials,
vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 77–97, 2014.
[119] M. Moshtaghi, J. C. Bezdek, T. C. Havens, C. Leckie, S.
Karunasekera, S. Rajasegarar, and M. Palaniswami, “Streaming
analysis in wireless sensor networks,” Wirel. Commun. Mob.
Comput., vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 905–921, 2014.
[120] A. Bialecki, M. Cafarella, D. Cutting, and O. O’MALLEY,
“Hadoop: a framework for running applications on large clusters
built of commodity hardware,” Wiki http//lucene. apache.
org/hadoop, vol. 11, 2005.
[121] P. G. Brown, “Overview of SciDB: large scale array storage,
processing and analysis,” in Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGMOD
International Conference on Management of data, 2010, pp. 963–
968.
[122] X. Meng, J. Bradley, B. Yavuz, E. Sparks, S. Venkataraman, D. Liu,
J. Freeman, D. B. Tsai, M. Amde, and S. Owen, “Mllib: Machine
learning in apache spark,” J. Mach. Learn. Res., vol. 17, no. 34, pp.
1–7, 2016.
[123] M. H. Iqbal and T. R. Soomro, “Big data analysis: Apache storm
perspective,” Int. J. Comput. Trends Technol., pp. 9–14, 2015.
[124] D. Laney, “3D data management: Controlling data volume, velocity
and variety,” META Gr. Res. Note, vol. 6, p. 70, 2001.
[125] B. Data, “Principles and best practices of scalable realtime data
systems,” N. Marz J. Warren. Henning, 2014.
[126] M. Chen, S. Mao, and Y. Liu, “Big Data: A Survey,” Mob. Networks
Appl., vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 171–209, 2014.

12