* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download 6.M. Rehena Sulthana.pmd
Survey
Document related concepts
Multiprotocol Label Switching wikipedia , lookup
Wireless USB wikipedia , lookup
Internet protocol suite wikipedia , lookup
Network tap wikipedia , lookup
Distributed firewall wikipedia , lookup
Deep packet inspection wikipedia , lookup
Airborne Networking wikipedia , lookup
Computer network wikipedia , lookup
Policies promoting wireless broadband in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Wake-on-LAN wikipedia , lookup
IEEE 802.11 wikipedia , lookup
Recursive InterNetwork Architecture (RINA) wikipedia , lookup
Wireless security wikipedia , lookup
Piggybacking (Internet access) wikipedia , lookup
List of wireless community networks by region wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 1, January-June 2011, pp. 27-29 © Global Research Publications–ISSN:0974-4320 PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF IPV4, IPV6 AND ZIGBEE PROTOCOLS M. REHENA SULTHANA* AND N. RAMA** Abstract: Sensor networks have become increasingly important in various areas and most current applications require connectivity between sensor networks and internet. Internet usage is increasing rapidly. In such scenario, communication of two nodes is possible only if they find each other. Various addressing protocols have been developed to obtain this. IPV4 is the internet protocol with version 4. It has limited address, this limited address does not meet the growth of the internet. IPV6 has many enhancements compared to IPV4. It was developed with security in mind. Enhancements of IPV6 over IPV4 include extended address space, aggregative routes, automatic configuration, improved security, enhanced mobility and support for quality of service. The Zigbee protocol is designed to communicate data through hostile RF environments that are common in commercial and industrial applications. Keywords: IPV6, IPV4, Zigbee, 6LoWPAN. 1. INTRODUCTION 2. IPV4 AND IPV6 COMPARISON Recently internet has become a common language in daily lives. The number of hosts grows exponentially. Second the bandwidth requirements increasing very rapidly. Another serious problem is that the number of IP address is going to run out. To provide more IP address, IPV6 is proposed. It expands the length of IP address from 32 bit (IPv4) to 128 bits[3]. Since the exhaustion of IPV4 address in the immediate future, IPV6 will be introduced and coexist with IPV4 for a long time. The Internet Engineering Task force (IETF) has been working on the IPV6 specifications in order to address the limitations caused by IPV4. IPV6 is also referred as Next Generation Internet Protocol (IPng). ZigBee is a low-cost, low-power, wireless mesh networking standard. First, the low cost allows the technology to be widely deployed in wireless control and monitoring applications. Second, the low power-usage allows longer life with smaller batteries. Third, the mesh networking provides high reliability and more extensive range. ZigBee protocols are intended for use in embedded applications requiring low data rates and low power consumption that can be used for industrial control, embedded sensing, medical data collection [2]. The resulting network will use very small amounts of power — individual devices must have a battery life of at least two years to pass ZigBee certification. The IEEE 802.15.4/Zigbee protocol stack has been considered as a promising technology for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN)[6].Wireless sensor network provide the low rate, wireless interconnection of ultra low cost sensor/actuator devices to enable the cyber world to sense and affect the real physical environment. IPV4 allows for 32 bit IP address space whereas IPV6 allows for 128 bit IP address with the increased IP address size up to 3.4x1038 different IP addresses can be defined. In IPV4 it has four octets separated by decimals. Each octet represents 8 bits. The first octet represents the network address and last three octets represent the host address. Each octet can take any number from from 0 to 255. The unique possible combinations of IPV4 address to 232. In Ipv4 an IP address is divided into the network id and the host id [2].It has four classes. Class A: 0.0.0.0 to 127.255.255.255 Class B: 128.0.0.0 to 191.255.255.255 Class C: 192.0.0.0 to 223.255.255.255 Class D: 224.0.0.0 to 255.255.255.255 Class A type is used for large size networks. Class B type is used for medium sized networks. Class C is used for relatively small networks and Class D is used for multicast networks. IPV6 uses hexadecimal system and each address is assigned a space of 16 bytes (compared to 4 bytes in IPV4).This increases the IP address number possibilities to 2128 which is vast enough to accommodate the need of all networks in the future. IPV6 routers are not allowed to fragment packets they forward. Only the original sender of the IPV6 packet is permitted to break the packet into fragments. This has significant implications for network security because ICMP packets must be permitted through all IPV6 networks. The time to live field is replaced by the hop limit field. The option field is no longer part of the header as it was in IPV4.The options are specified in the optional IPV6 extension headers. The removal of the options field from the header provides * Research Scholar, Bharathiar University, Coimbatore-641046. ** Associate Professor, Presidency College, Chennai. 28 Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Engineering for more efficient routing. For better support of real time traffic, IPV6 includes “labeled flows in its specification” with this routers can recognize the end-to-end flow to which transmitted packets belong to. IPV4 is limited to stateful protocols such as dynamic host configuration protocol, which require a server to store a requesting host’s configuration information [6]. IPV6 introduces a simplified stateless auto configuration procedure where a node can configure its IP address based only on local information that is without contacting a server. Ipv6 provides enhance mobility support that allow mobile nodes to change their locations and addresses without losing the existing connections through which those nodes are communicating. IPSec from (IETF) provides network layer encryption and authentication for IP based networks [6]. In IPV4, widely used (NAT), but IPV6 expands address space and makes NAT unnecessary.IPV6 is extended to increas6e the use of IPSec in end-to-end communication using authentication header and encapsulating security payload extension header. Figure 1: ZigBee Network Model 3. ZIGBEE STANDARD The Zigbee is suited for the family of LoW-Rate Wireless Personal Area Networks (LR-WPANs), allowing network creation, management, and data transmission over a wireless channel with high energy savings. It uses three types of devices coordinator, router and end device. The router is used to relay packets towards the correct destination in the absence of the direct communication link. The coordinator, in addition to relaying the packets, can also create the network, exchange the parameters used by the other nodes to communicate and send network management commands. The router and the coordinator are referred to as Full Function Devices (FFDs). The end devices, referred to as Reduced Function Devices (RFDs), can only collect data values from sensors, insert these values into proper packets, and send them to their destinations [5]. The Zigbee standard is based, at the first two layers of the OSI stack, on the IEEE 802.15.4 standard.Zigbee supports star, cluster and mesh topologies. ZigBee makes possible completely networked homes where all devices are able to communicate and be controlled by a single unit. Zigbee formalizes and designs a higher level architecture and communication protocol based on the IEEE 802.15.4 PHY/MAC layers as one of the top standard for reliable and mutual connection between small sized devices of very low cost and low power consumption. Zigbee focuses on home and building automation, medical sensor applications and so on. Zigbee enables to form large scale sensor networks by connecting zigbee transceivers to various sensors (action, light, pressure, temperature and humidity)[1]. Figure 2: IEEE 802.15.4 / ZigBee Stack Architecture 4. 6LOWPAN(LOW POWER WIRELESS PERSONAL AREA NETWORKS) Due to the rapid development of new paradigm applications, wireless networks are morphing into IEEE 802.15.4–the standard for LoWPAN which are playing an essential role in the current scenario. The IPV6 –WSN network is used for transmission of IPV6 packets[3]. It is based on combination of IEEE 802.15.4 and IPV6.The IPV6 –WSN is based on a 6 LoWPAN stack specified into the RFC’s and drafts of IETF working group. The IPV6- WSN are inexpensive, low performance, wireless communication networks and are formed by devices complying with IEEE 802.15.4 standard. 6 LoWPAN has defined header compression and encapsulation mechanisms that allows IPV6 packets to be sent to and received from over IEEE 802.15.4 based networks.IEEE 802.15.4 devices provides sensing communication ability in the wireless domain .The target for IP networking for low power radio communication are applications that need wireless internet connection at low 29 Performance Analysis of IPV4, IPV6 and Zigbee Protocols data rates. Examples include automations, entertainment applications in home, office and factory. 5. CONCLUSION In this paper I have analyzed the concepts of IPV4, IPV6 and Zigbee protocols .Also I investigated on 6 LoWPAN technology, where my future research work of associating IPV6 packets on 6 LoWPAN will be implemented. wireless personal area network, Hyoung Jun kim, won jay song, sang ha Kim. [2] A fast and scalable IPV4 and 6 address lookup algorithm, Seiven leu, Ruay-shiung chang. [3] Performance analysis of gateway discovery techniques: IPV6 based wireless sensor networks, Dhanjay singh and daeyeoul Kim. [4] An object oriented model of IPV4/IPV6 network management, ZHA qin, MA yan. [5] www.zigbee.org REFERENCES [1] Light-weighted internet protocol version6 for Low power [6] IPV4/IPV6 security and threat comparisons, Emre Durdagi, Ali buldu.