A Comparative Analyses Of Network Formation In Low-power Lossy Networks: ContikiMAC vs Orchestra-enabled TSCH

TL;DR

This paper compares ContikiMAC and Orchestra-enabled TSCH MAC protocols in Low-power Lossy Networks, revealing that ContikiMAC significantly outperforms TSCH in network formation time and provides insights into energy consumption and network convergence.

Contribution

It provides a detailed comparative analysis of two MAC protocols for LLNs, highlighting their performance differences in network formation and energy efficiency.

Findings

ContikiMAC outperforms Orchestra-enabled TSCH by 13 times in network formation.

The analysis offers insights into energy consumption and network convergence times.

The study guides protocol selection for efficient LLN deployment.

Abstract

Medium Access Control (MAC) layer protocols are the underlying paradigms which dictate the transmission & reception of data in any network. Particularly for Low-powered Lossy Networks (LLNs), the design and selection of appropiate MAC-layer protocols is crucial inorder to satisfy several networking objectives such as joining time, network lifetime, energy consumption, end-to-end-delay, etc. In this report, we have presented a comparative analysis between Contiki-MAC and Orchestra-enabled TSCH protocol which provides insights towards the network joining & convergence time as well as an estimate of the energy consumption required of build such LLNs. Our results indicates that Contiki-MAC outperforms Orchestra-enabled TSCH by a factor of 13 times in network formation.