RPL device Net-works (WSNs). commonplace routing protocols like OSPF

RPL was projected as an answer for routing in low-power and lossy networks (LLNs) and catered to distinctive routing challenges. LLNs ar generally resource forced in terms of memory, battery life and process power. They embody Wireless Personal space Networks (WPANs), low-power transmission line Communication networks (PLC) and Wireless device Net-works (WSNs). commonplace routing protocols like OSPF weren’t fitted to the special challenges that LLNs display. RPL was specially designed to beat these challenges. It enclosed several specific options like dynamic rate of management message dispatch supported network consistency and addressing topology changes only information packets got to be sent73. because of such style issues, RPL was able to stay conservative in terms of forced resources. However, the RPL feature set enclosed repetitions of tasks already performed by alternative informatics layers. It additionally enclosed several uncalled-for options that were ne’er employed in real deployments. Consequently, the specification well-tried a lot of too complicated to im-plement in entireness on one resource forced node.Due to this, several current implementations of RPL solely implement a set of the first feature-set, creating them non-interoperable. so as to be standards-compliant and thereby practical, it’s needed that the implementations embody a definite set of options, that isn’t continually potential given the scale and memory limitations of the nodes operative in LLNs. in addition, the underspecification and ambiguity within the standards document bring about to an outsized variety of implementation decisions, several of that adversely impact overall performance.This thesis analyses the shortcomings of RPL, and additionally proposes a replacement routing protocol that might probably function a typical designed o?of RPL with less complexness and a reduced feature-set.