• RPL
• Internet of Things
• DODAG
• Trickle

ELow-power and Lossy Networks (LLNs) are a class of network in which both the routes and their interconnect are constrained. LLN routers typically operate with constraints on processing power, memory, and energy (battery power). Their interconnect are characterized by high loss rates, low data rates, and instability. LLNs are comprised of anything from a few dozen to thousands of routers. Supported traffic flows include point-to-point (between devices inside the LLN), point-to-multipoint (from a central control point to a subset of devices inside the LLN), and multipoint-to-point (from devices inside the LLN towards a central control point). The trickle algorithm allows nodes in a LLN to exchange information in a highly robust, energy efficient, simple, and scalable manner. Trickle uses two mechanisms to achieve efficient routing: (1) rate adaption where the nodes send control traffic less often when the network is stable, and (2) suppression where a node avoids sending control traffic if the information has already been recently sent by neighboring nodes. The performance of the protocol is analyzed considering different Trickle parameters in order to capture their impact on Network Formation Time, Energy Consumption, Control Traffic Overhead, and Packet Delivery Ratio for three different trickle algorithms i.e. Trickle, Trickle with Synchronizing Timer intervals, and Trickle with fair broadcast, and results highlights that all the algorithms can form the Network at the same time, but the energy consumption and Packet Delivery ratio are better in the case of Trickle with Synchronizing Trickle intervals.

In this work an extensive performance of the protocol is analyzed considering different Trickle parameters in order to capture their impact on Network Formation Time, Energy Consumption, Control Traffic Overhead, and Packet Delivery Ratio for three different trickle algorithms i.e. Trickle, Trickle with Synchronizing Timer intervals (Trickle-S), and Trickle with fair broadcast (Trickle-F). And the results highlighted that the non-deterministic nature of Trickle can lead to sub-optimal route formation and high energy consumption. Trickle-F mitigates from sub-optimal route formation with the same energy consumption of Trickle. Trickle-S forms a better route with good power consumption than Trickle and Trickle-F, and mitigates from forming a sub- optimal route. Trickle-Fair broadcast suppression and Synchronizing Trickle intervals (Trickle- FS) is demonstrated to be effective in obtaining more efficient routes with the same power consumption of Trickle-S, this proposed solution is a new with respect to the existing literature.