ResearchBib Share Your Research, Maximize Your Social Impacts
Sign for Notice Everyday Sign up >> Login


Journal: International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Technology (IJARET) (Vol.10, No. 2)

Publication Date:

Authors : ;

Page : 805-813

Keywords : Internet of Things; IoT; communication protocols; MQTT; CoAP; HTTP; AMQP; message delivery time; message loss rate; bandwidth consumption; lightweight; UDP; TCP; resource-constrained devices;

Source : Downloadexternal Find it from : Google Scholarexternal


The Internet of Things (IoT) has revolutionized the way devices interact with each other, allowing them to collect and exchange data autonomously. However, for these devices to communicate effectively, efficient and reliable communication protocols are required. This paper provides an analysis of the performance of different communication protocols for IoT applications. The communication protocols reviewed in this paper include MQTT, CoAP, HTTP, and AMQP. These protocols were chosen because they are widely used in IoT applications and have different features, including message size, reliability, and security. To evaluate the performance of these protocols, various metrics were considered, including message delivery time, message loss rate, and bandwidth consumption. The experiments were conducted using a custom-built IoT testbed that included multiple IoT devices and a Raspberry Pi as a gateway. The results of the experiments indicate that MQTT is the most efficient protocol for IoT applications, with the lowest message delivery time, lowest message loss rate, and lowest bandwidth consumption. This is due to MQTT's lightweight nature, which allows it to transmit messages quickly and efficiently, making it suitable for low-power and low-bandwidth devices. CoAP also performed well in the experiments, with a comparable message delivery time to MQTT, but a slightly higher message loss rate and bandwidth consumption. CoAP's efficiency comes from its use of UDP rather than TCP, which reduces the overhead of the protocol, making it suitable for resource-constrained devices. HTTP and AMQP, on the other hand, performed poorly in the experiments, with higher message delivery times, message loss rates, and bandwidth consumption than MQTT and CoAP. This is due to their more complex nature, which results in higher protocol overheads.

Last modified: 2023-05-03 16:31:09