Power Evaluation of IOT Application Layer Protocols

TL;DR

This paper compares the power consumption of IoT application layer protocols MQTT, MQTT-SN, CoAP, and HTTP through simulations, finding MQTT-SN to be the most energy-efficient, which is crucial for large-scale IoT deployments.

Contribution

It provides a comparative analysis of key IoT application layer protocols' power consumption using simulation tools, highlighting MQTT-SN as the most energy-efficient option.

Findings

MQTT-SN has the lowest power consumption.

CoAP consumes slightly more power than MQTT.

HTTP consumes the most power among the protocols.

Abstract

The Internet of Things has affected all aspects of daily life, and the number of IoT devices is increasing day by day. According to forecasts, the number of Internet of Things devices will reach one trillion devices by 2035. The increase in the number of devices connected to the Internet will cause various concerns. One of the most important concerns is the energy and power consumption of these devices. Although Internet of Things modules are low in energy consumption, their widespread and large-scale use has made the issue of power consumption become the most important challenge in this field. For this reason, it is necessary to use communication protocols that, in addition to establishing efficient communication, impose minimal power consumption on the network. In this paper, application layer protocols such as MQTT, MQTT-SN, CoAP, and HTTP are simulated using the tools available in the Contiki operating system, including COOJA and Powertrace, and they { are evaluated} and compared with each other in terms of power consumption. According to the simulations performed by the mentioned tools, the MQTT-SN protocol was the least consuming protocol in terms of power consumption. After that, the CoAP protocol is placed, and with a slight difference, the MQTT protocol, which consumes more than MQTT-SN. Finally, the HTTP protocol consumes the most power, which makes it unsuitable for communication in the Internet of Things