45 GHz frequency band, a 8-bit or 16-bit CPU, 4 KB to 8 KB of RAM and 48 http://www.selleckchem.com/products/Romidepsin-FK228.html KB to 128 KB of ROM. Nodes are usually battery powered and the communication range is reduced to a maximum of 10 meters when transmitting with the maximum output power. Crossbow��s TelosB mote [2] is a typical example of a low-cost wireless sensor used in LoWPAN. It features 16-bit RISC MCU at 8 MHz and 16 registers. The platform offers 10 kB of RAM, 48kB of flash memory and 16 kB of EEPROM. TelosB Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries motes have been used as a hardware platform to develop our test-bed network.While the IEEE 802.15.4 is nowadays a standard for the lower protocol layers of WSNs, problems arise when approaching upper layers. In fact, the growing interest around WSNs has led to the creation of different communication protocol proposals.

This variety of solutions has limited the possibility to interconnect and integrate various WSNs based on different network protocols. The adoption of the IPv6 protocol as the network layer has been proposed to overcome these problems. The original proposal was made by a specific IETF working group created with the aim Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries of implementing the IPv6 protocol over LoWPAN [3]. The resulting protocol stack goes under the name of 6LoWPAN [4].Specifications on how to support transmission of IPv6 packets over LoWPAN and meet the IPv6 requirements have been defined in the RFC 4944 [5]. An intermediate layer between network and data link layers, known as the adaptation layer, has been created to enable IPv6 datagrams to be conforming to the lower layer requirements.

Actually, in IPv6 specification [6] the MTU is fixed to 1,280 bytes, while the MTU defined for IEEE 802.15.4 to 127 bytes [1]. The adaptation layer provides fragmentation and reassembling Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries of IPv6 packets as well as header compression. Fragmentation of the IPv6 datagram is necessary to meet the MTU specification of the 802.15.4 standard, while the header compression is required to reduce the space consumed by the 40-byte length IPv6 header. Finally, the adaptation layer can also be involved in forwarding decisions. Depending on which layer is in charge of routing decisions, 6LoWPAN classifies routing into two categories: In mesh under the layer of interest is the adaptation layer, while in route over it is the network layer.In this paper, we analyse both routing schemes focusing on how they forward 6LoWPAN frames.

We consider 6LoWPAN communications requiring IP fragmented packets. The analysis is conducted through a performance evaluation Inhibitors,Modulators,Libraries of mesh under and route over in terms of latency and energy consumption. For our Entinostat purpose, we develop and test both solutions in a real 6LoWPAN implementation. Moreover, in Wortmannin purchase this paper we present a new routing proposal based on mesh under. Our proposal seeks to improve the mesh under fragment processing by adding control on the fragment forwarding process.