Melola Discovery

← Melola Discovery

Open access Jurnal SINTA 1

Message queue telemetry transport and lightweight machine-to-machine comparison based on performance efficiency under various scenarios

International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE) · Vol. 12 No. 6 (2022)

DOI
10.11591/ijece.v12i6.pp6293-6302
ISSN
2722-2578, 2088-8708
Published
2022-12-01
Publisher
Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science
License
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0

Abstract

Internet of things (IoT) is been advancing over a long period of time in many aspects. For data transfer between IoT devices in a wireless sensor network, various IoT protocols are proposed. Among them, the most widely used are constrained application protocol (CoAP) and message queue telemetry transport (MQTT). Overcoming the limitations of CoAP, lightweight machine-to-machine (LwM2M) framework was designed above CoAP. Recent statistics show that LwM2M and MQTT are the widely used, but LwM2M is still less used than MQTT. Our paper is aimed at comparing both MQTT and LwM2M on the basis of performance efficiency, which will be achieved by sending same file through both protocols to the server. Performance efficiency will be calculated in two scenarios, i) when the client makes a connection with the server i.e., while initial connection and ii) while sending data file to server i.e., while data transfer. Both the protocols will be tested on the number of packets sent and the variability of packet size throughout the session. Experimental results indicated that LwM2M outperformed MQTT in both above scenarios by almost 69%. Therefore, we concluded by stating that LwM2M is best choice over MQTT, but MQTT can still be used in some situations if necessary.

Collaboration network of the authors

8 authors · 16 co-authorship links · 4 across different organisations

Hover or tap a name to highlight its co-authors. Double-click to open the author's page.

  • Symbiosis International University
  • Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies
  • Different organisations
  • Same organisation
  • Affiliation unknown
  • Thicker line = more joint articles · bigger circle = more articles
Show as table
Co-authorOrganisationJoint articles
Tanvi GargNarsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies1
Navid KagalwallaNarsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies1
Prathamesh Padmakar ChuriNarsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies1
Sanjay DeshmukhNarsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies1

Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.

This record comes from Crossref (what the publisher deposited), because the journal's own OAI-PMH endpoint could not be harvested.

Metadata source: Crossref API (cadangan, berdasarkan ISSN) https://api.crossref.org/journals/2088-8708/works, first harvested 27 Okt 2026, last seen 1 Nov 2026.
Metadata as oai_dc, converted from Crossref
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/"><dc:title>Message queue telemetry transport and lightweight machine-to-machine comparison based on performance efficiency under various scenarios</dc:title><dc:creator>Singh, Drishti</dc:creator><dc:creator>Singh, Ria</dc:creator><dc:creator>Gupta, Aryan</dc:creator><dc:creator>Pawar, Ambika Vishal</dc:creator><dc:description>&lt;jats:p&gt;&amp;lt;span&amp;gt;Internet of things (IoT) is been advancing over a long period of time in many aspects. For data transfer between IoT devices in a wireless sensor network, various IoT protocols are proposed. Among them, the most widely used are constrained application protocol (CoAP) and message queue telemetry transport (MQTT). Overcoming the limitations of CoAP, lightweight machine-to-machine (LwM2M) framework was designed above CoAP. Recent statistics show that LwM2M and MQTT are the widely used, but LwM2M is still less used than MQTT. Our paper is aimed at comparing both MQTT and LwM2M on the basis of performance efficiency, which will be achieved by sending same file through both protocols to the server. Performance efficiency will be calculated in two scenarios, i) when the client makes a connection with the server i.e., while initial connection and ii) while sending data file to server i.e., while data transfer. Both the protocols will be tested on the number of packets sent and the variability of packet size throughout the session. Experimental results indicated that LwM2M outperformed MQTT in both above scenarios by almost 69%. Therefore, we concluded by stating that LwM2M is best choice over MQTT, but MQTT can still be used in some situations if necessary.&amp;lt;/span&amp;gt;&lt;/jats:p&gt;</dc:description><dc:publisher>Institute of Advanced Engineering and Science</dc:publisher><dc:date>2022-12-01</dc:date><dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type><dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format><dc:identifier>https://doi.org/10.11591/ijece.v12i6.pp6293-6302</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>10.11591/ijece.v12i6.pp6293-6302</dc:identifier><dc:source>International Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering (IJECE); Vol 12 No 6 (2022); 6293</dc:source><dc:source>2722-2578</dc:source><dc:source>2088-8708</dc:source><dc:relation>https://ijece.iaescore.com/index.php/IJECE/article/viewFile/28574/16116</dc:relation><dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0</dc:rights></oai_dc:dc>