How To Disrupt The Internet of Things With Unified Networking

Low Power Local Area Network Connectivity, circa 2014

“IoT 1.0”

One-way data: endpoint is slave to edge AP

Short Range, Poor Signal Penetration

Devices are either mains-powered or “dumb”

Targeting home automation, wearables

Weak Security Features

High data latency: connect to proxy, not sensor data

Non-real-time, high latency

Large Memory Footprint

Low Power Local Area Network Connectivity, circa 2014

One-way data: endpoint is slave to edge AP

Short Range, Poor Signal Penetration

Devices are either mains-powered or “dumb”

Targeting home automation, wearables

Weak Security Features

High data latency: connect to proxy, not sensor data

Non-real-time, high latency

Large Memory Footprint

“IoT 1.0”

Bluetooth LE is the only major success story here, but BLE is a personal area network protocol, not a local area network protocol

4

up to 30 Miles

Long Range / “LPWAN”

30 feet 3 miles300 feet

Medium Range

Today: New Opportunities with Low Power Wide Area Networks

Short Range / “LPLAN”

NB-IoT

5

up to 30 Miles

Long Range / “LPWAN”

30 feet 3 miles300 feet

Medium Range

NB-IoT

Today: New Opportunities with Low Power Wide Area Networks

Short Range / “LPLAN”

Key features: long range, multi-year battery life, cellular network model, large number of devices per cell

6

up to 30 Miles

Long Range / “LPWAN”

30 feet 3 miles300 feet

Medium Range

We Believe LPWAN’s Will Eventually Overtake Most Low Power IoT Implementations

Short Range / “LPLAN”

NB-IoT

7

We Believe LPWAN’s Will Eventually Dominate Most Low Power IoT Implementations

If better range and indoor coverage are effectively “free”, with no sacrifice in performance, battery life, or device cost, then why would you continue to rely on outdated LPLAN technologies?

8

LPLAN’s Usually Offer Two Distinguishing Features

Requirement LPLAN LPWAN

Multi-year Battery Life ✓ ✓Low Cost (sub-$5) Devices ✓ ✓Indoor Location Precision ✓ ❌

Mesh Networking ✓ ❌

(ZigBee, Thread, 6lowPAN, et al) (LoRa, SigFox, NB-IoT)

9

Requirement LPLAN LPWAN

Multi-year Battery Life ✓ ✓Low Cost (sub-$5) Devices ✓ ✓Indoor Location Precision ✓ ❌

Mesh Networking ✓ ❌

(ZigBee, Thread, 6lowPAN, et al) (LoRa, SigFox, NB-IoT)

LPLAN’s Usually Offer Two Distinguishing Features

By solving for these two features, LPWAN’s can substitute for most or all of today’s LPLAN technologies

10

Requirement LPLAN LPWAN

Multi-year Battery Life ✓ ✓Low Cost (sub-$5) Devices ✓ ✓Indoor Location Precision ✓ ❌

Mesh Networking ✓ ❌

(ZigBee, Thread, 6lowPAN, et al) (LoRa, SigFox, NB-IoT)

LPLAN’s Usually Offer Two Distinguishing Features

We Can Bridge The Gap Between These Two Classes To Bring Us Closer to Unified

Connectivity

11

One-way data: endpoint is slave to edge AP

Poor spectrum management

No indoor location capability

No multi-hop or mesh networking

Weak security features

High data latency, connect to proxy

Fully bi-directional “pull” and “push”

Better spectrum management/throughput

Real-time indoor location to 1m precision

Multi-hop, Mesh, P2P, & Ad Hoc networking

Stronger security features

Low Latency, real-time data access

LPWAN 1.0 LPWAN + LPLAN via Haystack

Getting To Unified Connectivity

Good battery life Better battery life

12

Indoor Location with Haystack

13

AP 1. Access point keeps network synchronized, and gets vertex

data from users in the area

Endpoint 2. Endpoints are mobile, battery-powered devices

3. Small battery or USB-powered

“reference nodes” are placed on fixed

things & places

14

AP

Today, no LPWAN or NB-IoT technology offers a high-precision, real time, indoor location capability on its own.

But Haystack does this.

Endpoint

Using RSSI & RF “fingerprinting” with scattered reference nodes: ±1m precision has been observed

15

Mesh Networking With Haystack

16

Traditional Mesh Networking

Older IoT technologies sometimes use “meshing” to enable endpoints to “daisy chain” themselves together so that access points that are otherwise o b s t r u c t e d b y w a l l s , ceilings, and other forms of interference can be reached by endpoints.

AP

Endpoints

17

Traditional Mesh Networking

Meshing is used by technologies like ZigBee but over surprisingly short distances, due primarily to the poor choice of RF frequency used by ZigBee and others like Thread.

AP

First Hop

Second Hop

18

LPWAN Mesh Networking With Haystack

AP

APAP

AP

AP AP AP

AP

Long-range LPWAN networks are very similar to cellular networks where long range, good signal propagation …

19

Mesh Networking With Haystack

AP

APAP

AP

AP AP AP

AP

… and overlapping access points reduce the need for meshing or hopping. Where required, we can still mesh endpoints together to ensure messages reach an alternate

access point in the event of an access point failure …

20

Mesh Networking With Haystack

AP

APAP

AP

AP AP AP

AP

… where data “hops” to one or more endpoints before being accessed by an alternate access point

“Orphaned” Endpoint

“Meshed” Endpoint

21

Mesh Networking With Haystack

AP

APAP

AP

AP AP AP

AP “Orphaned” Endpoint

“Meshed” Endpoint

Today, no LPWAN or NB-IoT technology offers mesh or multi-hop endpoint routing on its own.

But Haystack does it. In real-time.

22

How Haystack Bridges The LPWAN-LPLAN Gap

23

OSI Layer

7 Application AllJoyn + OIC + NDEF + UDP

6 Presentation

DASH7 Corelow power low latency

low cost

5 Session

4 Transport

3 Network

2 Data Link

1 Physical Various Options

One Stack = LPWAN + LPLAN

‣ Operates across LPWAN technologies like LoRa, NB-IoT ‣ Real-time indoor location to 1 meter precision ‣ Excellent P2P, ad hoc, multi-hop networking features ‣ Excellent range and signal propagation, up to 20 miles ‣ 10+ year battery life ‣ Excellent in dense-packed endpoint environments ‣ Operates in unlicensed and licensed spectrum ‣ Low latency, real-time queries ‣ Secure device discovery and other unique security and

authentication features ‣ Enhances performance of most LPWAN technologies

OSI Layer

7 Application AllJoyn, Others AllJoyn, Others AllJoyn, Others AllJoyn, Others AllJoyn, Others AllJoyn, Others

6 Presentation

5 Session Partial Definition

4 Transport Partial Definition

3 Network Partial Definition

2 Data Link Partial Definition

1 Physical “PHY”

LoRa @ 169 - 960 MHz

Various @ 315 - 930 MHz

Various LTE Bands

Various @ 27 - 1025 MHz RPMA @ 2.4 GHz SigFox @ 900,

868 MHz

Example LPWAN PHY’s

24

NB-IoT

Deploying LPLAN Capabilities Across Multiple LPWAN Technologies

25

Haystack Endpoints with LoRa LoRa and LoRaWAN can operate concurrently with DASH7

Semtech LoRa Transceiver

Compact, low cost,

low-power WAN/LAN

nodes

OSI Layer

7 Application AllJoyn + OIC + NDEF + UDP

6 PresentationDASH7low power low latency ad-hoc star

LoRaWAN low power

high latency cellular WAN

5 Session

4 Transport

3 Network

2 Data Link + Adaptive RS Encoding

1 Physical LoRa CSS

The DASH7 stack can run concurrently with LoRaWAN, on the same hardware, allowing compliant LoRaWAN interoperation alongside higher-throughput, low latency Haystack DASH7 LAN usage.

26

Haystack Endpoints with NB-IoT Emerging LTE Cat NB1 PHY requirements fit neatly with Haystack capabilities

OSI Layer

7 Application NDEF + UDP/IP + Custom

6 PresentationDASH7 Core

low power low latency

low cost ad-hoc and WAN capable

5 Session

4 Transport

3 Network

2 Data Link

1 Physical MSK Downlink, OFDM uplink NB-IoT/LTE Cat NB1 transceiver

Compact, low cost,

low-power LTE-Cat-NB1/

LAN nodes

NB-IoT/LTE Cat NB1 spec presently lacks layers 2-6, but it stipulates requirements for channel agility and bursty communication.

Haystack DASH7 is the most suitable IoT stack for these requirements.

27

Requirement 6lowPAN LoRaWAN Actility Linklabs

Provide Robust Networking Features ✓ Some Some Some ✓

Real-Time Data Collection ❌ ❌ ❌ ❌ ✓Preserve or Improve

Long Range Messaging ❌ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓Provide Maximum Practical

Security & PrivacySome ❌ ❌ ❌ ✓

Preserve or Improve Battery Life ❌ ❌ ❌ Some ✓

How LPWAN Stacks Compare

28

LPWAN/LAN Use Case Examples

Supply Chain

Customer: Leading white goods manufacturer

Requirement: Track location and environmental condition of inventory in warehouse as well as wide area outdoor environments to reduce warranty claims and other shrinkage.

Heavy Industrial

Customer: Leading US-based diversified industrial

Requirement: Track location of customer assets - indoors and outdoors - in real-time as part of a new, aftermarket asset tracking service

Defense & Homeland Security

Customer: Leading US-based defense contractor

Requirement: Monitor location of contractors in and around sensitive facilities.

32

Customer: US-based health insurer

Requirement: Low cost indoor and metro-area tracking and monitoring of portable IT assets, including BYOD assets with PHI and PII data.

Health Care

33

Customer: Global real estate management firm

Requirement: Monitor and track a wide range of assets being managed for Fortune 1000 clients (cleaning equipment, master keychains, IT assets, outdoor maintenance equipment, etc.) in both indoor and outdoor environments.

Real Estate

34

Contact: Patrick Burns pat@haystacktechnologies.com (650) 315-3026

More Resources: • www.haystacktechnologies.com •The Indoor-Outdoor IoT http://bit.ly/2b65gRQ •Haystack’s open source firmware stack: http://bit.ly/1p5OjJg •The IoT Hunger Games http://bit.ly/1IkYRtO