A Reliable Architecture Based on
Reactive Microservices for IoT applications
Cleber Santana
Federal Institute of Bahia
Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
cleberlira@ifba.edu.br
Ernando Batista
Federal Institute of Bahia
Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
ernando.passos@ifba.edu.br
ABSTRACT
Microservices has recently been employed in Cloud Computing to
support the construction of large-scale systems that are resilient,
elastic and best suited to meet today’s demands. In Internet of
Things (IoT) a set of smart applications can be built in the most
different scenarios and that can impact the daily routine of people’s
lives. The development of applications and services at IoT brings
challenges such as deployment, elasticity and resilience. Microser-
vices developed with the characteristics of resilience, elasticity and
addressed to messages are considered reactive Microservices. Thus,
this paper proposes an architectural model based on reactive Mi-
croservices to improve the reliability of IoT applications from the
perspective of availability.
CCS CONCEPTS
• Information systems → Computing platforms; • Computer
systems organization → Distributed architectures.
KEYWORDS
Reactive Microservices, IoT applications, Reliability, Availability,
Internet of Things
ACM Reference Format:
Cleber Santana, Leandro Andrade, Brenno Mello, Ernando Batista, José
Vitor Sampaio, and Cássio Prazeres. 2019. A Reliable Architecture Based
on Reactive Microservices for IoT applications. In Brazilian Symposium on
Multimedia and the Web (WebMedia ’19), October 29-November 1, 2019, Rio
de Janeiro , Brazil. ACM, New York, NY, USA, 5 pages. https://doi.org/10.
1145/3323503.3345027
1 INTRODUCTION
Nowadays, a few applications are using the Microservices architec-
ture in domains such as IoT and Mobile [15], in order to support the
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.
WebMedia ’19, October 29-November 1, 2019, Rio de Janeiro , Brazil
© 2019 Association for Computing Machinery.
ACM ISBN 978-1-4503-6763-9/19/10. . . $15.00
https://doi.org/10.1145/3323503.3345027
Leandro Andrade Brenno Mello
Federal University of Bahia Federal University of Bahia
Salvador, Bahia, Brazil Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
leandrojsa@ufba.br brenno.mello@ufba.br
José Vitor Sampaio Cássio Prazeres
Federal University of Bahia Federal University of Bahia
Salvador, Bahia, Brazil Salvador, Bahia, Brazil
jose.sampaio@ufba.br prazeres@ufba.br
construction of large-scale systems that are more robust, resilient,
elastic and better adapted to meet current demands. Microservices
aim to build, manage and design architectures of small autonomous
units [14]. The applications based on the Microservices architecture
are polyglot, that is, they are constructed from the programming
language of the choice of the developer and the deployments are
carried out continuously [16], a few dozen times a day [24] and
hundreds of times in some cases[3], making the use of applications
by the numerous users more dynamic.
Microservices are Cloud-native architectures, and applications
based on this architectural style are designed to be resilient to
incidents and disruptions in the infrastructure, however, in some
scenarios these applications may fail and be unavailable for hours
and, in some cases, days (see CircleCI [7]), which has a negative
impact on the productive chain of these organizations.
In IoT currently, the world has 8.3 billion IoT devices and it is
estimated that by 2025 this number will reach 21.5 billion. These
new devices will be able to interact by providing new services
in different domains and environments, generating added value
for the user. IoT devices along with their tasks constitute domain
specific applications (e.g. smart cities, smart houses, healthcare)
and horizontal markets (e.g. ubiquitous computing and analytical
services), which constitute domain-independent services [21]. For
instance, in the Fish Farm scenario, the monitoring of variables (e.g
hydrological, hydraulic and quality) can improve the cultivation
of the species. In this scenario, Microservices can be distributed at
the edge of the network allowing elasticity and resilience to the
system [10]. Resilience is the ability to resist external and internal
failures; and elasticity refers the ability to system respond according
to the variation of demand [8]. The system must use asynchronous
messages in order to guarantee low coupling, isolation and location
transparency communication patterns to resilient [4]. Compliance
with these properties transforms the Microservices into a Reactive
Microservices [10].
Reactive Microservices can increases the dependability of the ap-
plications. Reliability is a priority requirement for IoT applications
that are concerned with quality of service (QoS) [25]. It refers to the
ability of a system to perform functions under specified conditions
for a specified period of time [13]. In addition, reliability takes into
consideration four sub-characteristics such as: maturity, which is
the ability of an application to meet reliability needs under normal
15
WebMedia ’19, October 29-November 1, 2019, Rio de Janeiro , Brazil
operation; availability, the ability of an application to be opera-
tional and accessible when required for use; fault tolerance, the
ability of an application to operate as intended despite the presence
of hardware or software faults and recoverability, which refers to
the ability of an application to recover the data directly affected,
in the event of failure, and to re-establish the desired state of the
application.
From these considerations, we claim that a monolithic architec-
ture may not be designed to deal with these issues. Therefore, this
leads to the need to design these applications with new architectural
approaches. In recent studies, [15] and [9] stated Microservices was
applied in IoT Applications and they can be deployed in Containers.
Container management systems, like Docker, and orchestration
systems, like Kubernetes, control applications and dynamically
provision their resources, which cloud services can be extremely
scalable, reliable, and reactive. Finally, in this paper we will discuss
our approach to the development of reliable IoT applications.
2 PROPOSAL
2.1 Internet of Things Infrastructure
In these visions that the literature presents on Internet of Things
there are some technologies that give sustentation for its operation.
Cloud Computing is one of the computational paradigms applied in
IoT. Cloud frees the end user and the companies of the specification
and details of the computational infrastructure necessary for the
operation of the applications. However, despite this ease, for latency-
sensitive applications that require neighboring nodes to work in
accordance with delay requirements, the Cloud Computing solution
is not the right choice. The Internet applications of Things are
framed in this perspective of latency sensitivity. In addition, they
require mobility support, geographic distribution, and location
awareness [5].
Given this scenario, a new platform called Fog Computing emerges
to meet the requirements imposed by the applications described
above. The researchers [6] explain that Fog Computing is not a new
paradigm that excludes Cloud Computing. Fog Computing enables
the creation of a new generation of applications and services that
interact with cloud computing for data management and analysis.
Fog Computing is a virtualized platform that provides computing,
storage, and network infrastructure services for communication
between cloud computing end devices and data centers.
The architecture of a Fog Computing infrastructure to support
the Internet Applications of Things is presented in Figure 1. This
architecture is divided into four levels. The first level, Embedded
Systems and Sensors, is related to the network of sensors with low
computational power and bandwidth that are employed for specific
tasks in the environment. The second level, Multi-Service Edge, is
where the distribution of services occurs at the edge of the network.
Through this, there is the possibility of achieving intelligence in
the Fog Computing environment. At the Core layer, long-range
communication technologies are applied, security and QoS require-
ments are also implemented. Finally, at the Data Center and Cloud
level is where applications that need more computing resources
are deployed, for example, processing, analysis and storage of the
large amount of historical data generated by IoT environments.
16
C. Santana et al.
Figure 1: Fog Computing and Internet of Things [6].
2.2 Archicteture
Firstly, the architecture defines that an IoT application consists of a
set of reactive Microservices that can be distributed on devices and
servers in Edge computing, Fog computing or Cloud computing.
Figure 2 illustrates the proposal overview. In this architecture, the
applications layer has two main parts: (i) Reactive Microservices
[10], which guides the IoT applications development; (ii) Integration
Container and Containers (Figure 2) which is the infrastructure
needed to implement the IoT applications. The characteristics of
each component are discussed below.
Reactive Microservices provides a architecture for the develop-
ment of applications capable of handling issues of failure and loss of
performance without affecting the behavior of an entire application.
We divided the logical layer of the architecture into two parts: Core
and Utilities. In Core we have the following components:
• IoT Message Channel provides a means of communication
so that different Microservices can communicate in a weakly
coupled way.
• Service Discovery Infrastructure provides an infrastruc-
ture for publishing and discovering services.
• Reactive broker provides the point of communication with
sensors and actuators through publish/subscribe messages.
• Circuit breaker provides a means of avoiding cascading
failures.
• Timeout and Bulkhead enable low coupling between ser-
vices.
• Health check Provides access to the Microservices status:
UP or Down.
The Utilities part of the architecture is used in our proposal to
provide support for the case studies to be implemented. In Utilities
we have the following components:
• Streamming Provides real-time data analysis.
• RESTful Provides access to IoT devices.
• Security Provides a layer for authentication and authoriza-
tion to services.
A Reliable Architecture Based on
Reactive Microservices for IoT applications
Figure 2: Overview of proposal architecture
Integration Container In addition to the software components
provided in our proposal, we have adopted the use of container
technologies to facilitate the deployment of the applications in the
devices and also to contribute in the improvement of availability
of IoT applications. Figure 3 illustrates the infrastructure adopted
in this paper to deploy IoT applications. This infrastructure can
be adopted in Edge, Fog and Cloud computing. This infrastructure
can be deployed to devices with lower computing power (usually
located in Edge computing) and devices with high computing power
(usually located in Fog and Cloud computing).
Figure 3: Infrastructure for IoT application.
2.3 Internet of Things Simulation
An IoT environment can be implemented in different domains such
as health, transportation and logistics, agriculture, security and
home automation [11]. Although such domains have some common
characteristics (e.g., dynamicity, scalability, heterogeneity) [6] [18],
some aspects related to the configuration of the IoT environment
and obtaining metrics that represent Quality of Service (QoS) may
17
WebMedia ’19, October 29-November 1, 2019, Rio de Janeiro , Brazil
vary. Also, due to financial or time constraints, it is not always
possible to test new functionalities (technologies, algorithms or
even architectures) directly in IoT environments with real devices.
In this context, it becomes useful to develop / adopt environ-
ments that can represent such IoT domains, especially when it
is possible to use the same technologies / codes implemented in
real environments. In addition, emulated / simulated environments
facilitate the acquisition of important QoS evaluation metrics in
IoT, such as network traffic, delay, jitter and packet loss [12]. The
simulation environment described in this section was implemented
using the Mininet 1 emulation tool. For this, the components of the
Fog of Things paradigm (described in Section 2.2 and works [20])
are considered: Sensors (virtual sensors), IoT Gateways (and their
technologies) and IoT Servers. Mininet is a network emulator that
allows for the creation of virtual hosts, switches, and links. The
devices created on Mininet can run real code, including applications
and libraries made for Linux systems, as well as the kernel's stack
and network. So, the codes developed can be tested on Mininet
instances (hosts) and then transferred to real devices with minimal
changes. These characteristics, combined with the flexibility in net-
working, position Mininet as a facilitator in the development and
prototyping of new solutions in IoT environments.
For modeling and simulation of a virtual sensor, some basic as-
pects must be respected: (i) simulation of sample collection(pseudo
samples) or consume data from real datasets and data storage of
short period; (ii) implantation of the communication protocol re-
sponsible for control the information flow among devices (sensors,
IoT Gateways, IoT Servers and Applications). The behavior and
architecture of the IoT Gateway and IoT Server components is the
same as described in Section 2.2 and works [10] [20] [1]. In this
case, all frameworks and codes created and executed in real envi-
ronments are used in the simulation with minimal or no changes.
As described, IoT Simulation makes it possible to create IoT
environments (including Reliable Microservices applications) in a
1 http://mininet.org/
WebMedia ’19, October 29-November 1, 2019, Rio de Janeiro , Brazil
simpler way, since it is possible to run multiple instances of IoT
devices through a single machine. In addition, it facilitates the
testing, debugging and acquisition of evaluation metrics, such as,
load balancing solution in IoT scenarios [2] and analysis of network
traffic according to the type of communication between FoT-Devices
and FoT-Gateway (i.e. sensors and IoT Gateways) [1].
3 RELATED WORKS
Power and Kotonya[19] presented a framework that provides sup-
port for fault tolerance. Taherizadeh, Stankovski and Grobelnik[22]
presented a computing architecture forborchestration of Microser-
vices from Edge Devices to Fog and Cloud Providers. Martins[17]
presented a proposal for reengineering, in which an IoT mid- dle-
ware that was developed from a monolithic architecture was recon-
structed from the adoption of Microservices, whose objective was
to improve the reliability and availability in the use of the IoT mid-
dleware. Nunez[23] states that most existing middlewares partially
meet the requirements of the IoT environment. In this context, the
authors affirm that there is a need for more research on issues such
as scalability, dynamic resource discovery, reliability, performance
and security.
Although these studies take into account reliability improve-
ment of IoT applications, they differ from this doctoral proposal in
different aspects. In the work of [23] and [17], the researchers acted
directly on the IoT middleware layer while this paper proposal
focuses on the application layer of the IoT architecture. The work
of[22] is focused on the orchestration of Microservices contained
in containers that can be performed from Egde to Fog and Cloud.
The work of [19] is a research related to the IoT application layer,
which investigates reliability improvement of IoT applications from
the perspective of fault tolerance.
4 FINAL REMARKS
In this paper we present an architecture proposal for the develop-
ment of IoT applications. Its objective is to improve the reliability
of these applications from the perspective of availability.
REFERENCES
[1] E. Batista, L. Andrade, R. Dias, A. Andrade, G. Figueiredo, and C. Prazeres. 2018.
Characterization and Modeling of IoT Data Traffic in the Fog of Things Paradigm.
In 2018 IEEE 17th International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications
(NCA). IEEE, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/NCA.2018.
8548340
[2] E. Batista, G. Figueiredo, M. Peixoto, M. Serrano, and C. Prazeres. 2018. Load
Balancing in the Fog of Things Platforms Through Software-Defined Networking.
In 2018 IEEE International Conference on Internet of Things (iThings) and IEEE
Green Computing and Communications (GreenCom) and IEEE Cyber, Physical and
Social Computing (CPSCom) and IEEE Smart Data (SmartData). IEEE, Halifax, NS,
Canada, Canada, 1785–1791. https://doi.org/10.1109/Cybermatics_2018.2018.
00297
[3] ZACK BLOOM. 2013. How We Deploy 300 Times a Day. Hubspot. Retrieved April
21, 2018 from https://product.hubspot.com/blog/how-we-deploy-300-times-a-
day
[4] Jonas Bonér. 2017. Reactive Microsystems The Evolution of Microservices at Scale.
O’Reilly Media, Gravenstein Highway North, Sebastopol.
[5] Flavio Bonomi, Rodolfo Milito, Preethi Natarajan, and Jiang Zhu. 2014. Fog
computing: A platform for internet of things and analytics. In Big Data and
Internet of Things: A Roadmap for Smart Environments. Springer, Gewerbestrasse
11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland, 169–186.
[6] Flavio Bonomi, Rodolfo Milito, Jiang Zhu, and Sateesh Addepalli. 2012. Fog
computing and its role in the internet of things. In Proceedings of the first edition
of the MCC workshop on Mobile cloud computing. ACM, ACM, New York, NY,
USA, 13–16.
18
C. Santana et al.
[7] CIRCLE CI. 2015. DB performance issue Incident Report for CircleCI. CIRCLE CI.
Retrieved July 2, 2018 from https://status.circleci.com/incidents/hr0mm9xmm3x6
[8] Rodrigo da Rosa Righi, Everton Correa, MÃąrcio Miguel Gomes, and Cristiano An-
drÃľ da Costa. 2018. Enhancing performance of IoT applications with load pre-
diction and cloud elasticity. Future Generation Computer Systems 1, 1 (2018), 1–13.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.future.2018.06.026
[9] Cleber Jorge Lira de Santana, Brenno de Mello Alencar, and Cassio Vinicius Ser-
afim Prazeres. 2018. Microservices: A Mapping Study for Internet of Things
Solutions. In 2018 IEEE International Symposium on Network Computing and
Applications (NCA). IEEE, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1–4.
[10] Cleber Jorge Lira de Santana, Brenno de Mello Alencar, and Cássio V. Serafim
Prazeres. 2019. Reactive Microservices for the Internet of Things: A Case Study
in Fog Computing. In Proceedings of the 34th ACM/SIGAPP Symposium on Applied
Computing (SAC ’19). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 1243–1251. https://doi.org/10.
1145/3297280.3297402
[11] Flavia C. Delicato, Paulo F. Pires, Thais Batista, Everton Cavalcante, Bruno Costa,
and Thomaz Barros. 2013. Towards an IoT Ecosystem. In Proceedings of the First
International Workshop on Software Engineering for Systems-of-Systems (SESoS
’13). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 25–28. https://doi.org/10.1145/2489850.2489855
[12] R. Duan, X. Chen, and T. Xing. 2011. A QoS Architecture for IOT. In 2011
International Conference on Internet of Things and 4th International Conference
on Cyber, Physical and Social Computing. IEEE, Dalian, China, 717–720. https:
//doi.org/10.1109/iThings/CPSCom.2011.125
[13] International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechni-
cal Commission et al. 2011. ISO/IEC 25010-Systems and software en-
gineeringâĂŤsystems and software Quality Requirements and Evaluation
(SQuaRE)âĂŤsystem and software quality models. Authors, Switzerland 1, 15
(2011), 1–15.
[14] Martin Fowler and James Lewis. 2014. Microservices, 2014. URL:
http://martinfowler. com/articles/microservices. html 1, 1 (2014), 1–1.
[15] P. D. Francesco, I. Malavolta, and P. Lago. 2017. Research on Architecting Mi-
croservices: Trends, Focus, and Potential for Industrial Adoption. In 2017 IEEE
International Conference on Software Architecture (ICSA). IEEE, Gothenburg, Swe-
den, 21–30. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICSA.2017.24
[16] Jez Humble and David Farley. 2011. Continuous delivery: reliable software releases
through build, test, and deployment automation. Addison-Wesley Boston, EUA.
[17] Lucas M. C. e Martins, Francisco L. de Caldas Filho, Rafael T. de Sousa Júnior,
William F. Giozza, and João Paulo C.L. da Costa. 2017. Increasing the De-
pendability of IoT Middleware with Cloud Computing and Microservices. In
Companion Proceedings of the10th International Conference on Utility and Cloud
Computing (UCC ’17 Companion). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 203–208. https:
//doi.org/10.1145/3147234.3148092
[18] H. B. Pandya and T. A. Champaneria. 2015. Internet of things: Survey and
case studies. In 2015 International Conference on Electrical, Electronics, Signals,
Communication and Optimization (EESCO). Scimago Journal, United States, 1–6.
https://doi.org/10.1109/EESCO.2015.7253713
[19] A. Power and G. Kotonya. 2018. A Microservices Architecture for Reactive
and Proactive Fault Tolerance in IoT Systems. In 2018 IEEE 19th International
Symposium on "A World of Wireless, Mobile and Multimedia Networks" (WoWMoM).
IEEE, Chania, Greece, 588–599. https://doi.org/10.1109/WoWMoM.2018.8449789
[20] C. Prazeres and M. Serrano. 2016. SOFT-IoT: Self-Organizing FOG of Things.
In 2016 30th International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and
Applications Workshops. IEEE, Crans-Montana, Switzerland, 803–808. https:
//doi.org/10.1109/WAINA.2016.153
[21] N. Shahid and S. Aneja. 2017. Internet of Things: Vision, application areas
and research challenges. In International Conference on I-SMAC (IoT in Social,
Mobile, Analytics and Cloud) (I-SMAC). IEEE, Palladam, India, 583–587. https:
//doi.org/10.1109/I-SMAC.2017.8058246
[22] Salman Taherizadeh, Vlado Stankovski, and Marko Grobelnik. 2018. A Capillary
Computing Architecture for Dynamic Internet of Things: Orchestration of Mi-
croservices from Edge Devices to Fog and Cloud Providers. Sensors 18, 9 (2018),
13–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18092938
[23] Pedro M. Taveras NÃžÃśez. 2017. A Reactive Microservice Architectural Model with
Asynchronous Programming and Observable Streams as an Approach to Developing
IoT Middleware. Ph.D. Dissertation. PUCMM. https://search.proquest.com/
docview/2026176055?accountid=14536 Copyright - Database copyright ProQuest
LLC; ProQuest does not claim copyright in the individual underlying works;
ÃŽltima atualizaÃğÃčo em - 2018-05-09.
[24] Mateusz Trojak. 2018. CI/CD at Scale. Brainly. Retrieved July 2, 2018 from
https://medium.com/engineering-brainly/ci-cd-at-scale-fdfb0f49e031
[25] Gary White, Vivek Nallur, and SiobhÃąn Clarke. 2017. Quality of service ap-
proaches in IoT: A systematic mapping. Journal of Systems and Software 132
(2017), 186 – 203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2017.05.125
A Reliable Architecture Based on
Reactive Microservices for IoT applications WebMedia ’19, October 29-November 1, 2019, Rio de Janeiro , Brazil

5 BIO José Victor de Almeida Sampaio is a

DSc. Cassio Prazeres has been an assistant pro- graduation student at Federal University of
fessor at Federal University of Bahia (UFBA) Bahia (UFBA) and scientific initiation scholar of
since 2010, where he leads research activities FAPESB since 2018. Currently, Sampaio is partici-
and projects in the Web/Internet area, teaches pant in the Web, Internet and Intelligent Systems
under-graduate and post-graduate courses, and Research Group (WISER) where he develops works about Microser-
is advisor for Ph.D, M.Sc. and B.Sc. students. Also vices for the Internet of Things architecture and his research inter-
at UFBA, Prazeres is a co-founder and leader of Web, Internet and ests are in Internet of Things and Microservices.
Intelligent Systems Research Group (WISER). He received a Ph.D MSc. Ernando Batista received M.S. (2017)
(2009) in Computer Science from University of Sao Paulo (USP). in Computer Science at Federal University of
He has several publications in international conferences and jour- Bahia (UFBA) and Degree in Computer Engineer-
nals. Prazeres is member of: Brazilian Computer Society (SBC); ing at Federal University of Recôncavo da Bahia.
IEEE Communications Society; IEEE Computer Society Technical Batista is a researcher of the Web, Internet and
Committee on Services Computing; IEEE Smart Cities Technical Intelligent Systems Research Group (WISER) and
Community; IEEE Internet of Things Technical Community; ACM professor of the Federal Institute of Bahia (IFBA).
SIGWEB; W3C Web of Things Community Group. Recently, Dr.
Prazeres had a sabbatical year as a Post Doctoral Researcher at
Insight Centre for Data Analytics at the National University of
Ireland, Galway (NUIG).
Msc. Cleber Santana is a Ph.D. candidate at
Federal University of Bahia (UFBA) and received
M.S. (2015) in Computer Systems at UNIFACS. He
is a researcher of the Web, Internet and Intelligent
Systems Research Group (WISER) and Nucleus
of Mathematics in Computational Environment
(NUMAC), where he works in projects related to Microservices,
Internet of Things, Semantic Web Services and Education. Santana
is a member of IEEE Communications Society and he has publica-
tions in international and national conference. Since 2013, he has
been a professor of the Federal Institute of Bahia (IFBA) and his re-
search interests are Web Semantic, Microservices, Reactive Systems,
Containers, Internet of Things, Fog Computing, and Education.
Msc. Leandro Andrade is a Ph.D. candidate
at Federal University of Bahia (UFBA) and re-
ceived M.S. (2014) and B.S. (2012) in Computer
Science at UFBA. He is researcher of the Web,
Internet and Intelligent Systems Research Group
(WISER) where he works in projects related to
Internet of Things, Fog Computing and Big Data. In 2017, Andrade
has done a Ph.D. internship at Insight Centre for Data Analytics at
the National University of Ireland, Galway. Leandro is a member of
the Brazilian Computer Society (SBC) and IEEE Communications
Society.His research interests are Web Semantic, Web Services, In-
ternet of Things, Machine Learning, Education and Free Software.
Brenno de Mello is a MSc. candidate at Fed-
eral University of Bahia (UFBA) and received a
degree in Systems Analysis and Development
(2016) from the Federal Institute of Bahia (IFBA).
He has experience in the area of Computer Sci-
ence, with emphasis on Information Systems and
Software Engineer. Currently, Mello is participant in the Web, In-
ternet and Intelligent Systems Research Group (WISER) and his
research interests are in Internet of Things, Data Stream Mining,
Fog Computing and Smart Water.

19