AOWIS will need to have an LPWAN (Low-Power Wide-Area Network) as its main backbone to communicate between Sensors, Controllers, Actuators. Here is an overview about the most common technologies available:
| ISO/OSI Layer |
LoRa |
LoRaWAN |
MQTT |
AMQP |
Zigbee |
Z-Wave |
EnOcean |
Sigfox |
NB-IoT
|
| 7. Application |
|
|
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
|
✔
|
| 6. Presentation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5. Session |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4. Transport |
|
|
✔ |
✔ |
|
|
|
|
✔
|
| 3. Network |
|
✔ |
|
|
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
✔
|
| 2. Data Link |
|
✔ |
|
|
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
✔
|
| 1. Physical |
✔ |
✔ |
|
|
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
✔ |
✔
|
For AOWIS, the most interesting is LoRaWAN for Layers 1 - 3 and MQTT for Layer 7:
- LoRa/LoRaWAN: Low-Power, Long-Range Radio transmission up to 15 km.
- MQTT: MQTT is optimized as the Application Layer for LPWANs.
- NB-IoT: Narrowband Internet of Things: LPWAN using 3GPP (part of LTE/4G family) mobile networks run by cellular operators.
MQTT vs AMQP
| Feature |
MQTT |
AMQP
|
| Full Name |
Message Queuing Telemetry Transport |
Advanced Message Queuing Protocol
|
| Purpose |
Lightweight pub/sub messaging for constrained devices |
Enterprise-grade messaging with queues, routing, and transactions
|
| Typical Use |
IoT sensors, mobile devices, low-bandwidth systems |
Backend systems, enterprise integration, cloud services
|
| Transport |
TCP/IP (often with TLS) |
TCP/IP (often with TLS)
|
| Complexity |
Simple, minimal implementation |
Complex, feature-rich
|
| Messaging Pattern |
Publish / Subscribe |
Publish/Subscribe, Queues, Request/Reply
|
| Broker |
Required |
Required
|
| Routing |
Topic-based |
Exchanges, routing keys, queues (flexible routing)
|
| Delivery Guarantees |
QoS 0, 1, 2 |
Acknowledgments, durable queues, transactions
|
| Bandwidth Usage |
Very low |
Higher overhead
|
| Device Suitability |
Excellent for constrained devices |
Typically server-side, not for small devices
|
| Scalability |
High (many devices, simple topics) |
High (complex distributed systems)
|
| Best Fit |
IoT, telemetry, real-time updates |
Enterprise workflows, reliable processing, integration
|
SigFox vs LoRaWAN
| Feature |
Sigfox |
LoRaWAN
|
| Type |
LPWAN (proprietary) |
LPWAN (open standard)
|
| Frequency |
Sub-GHz ISM bands (868 MHz EU, 902 MHz US) |
Sub-GHz ISM bands (868 MHz EU, 915 MHz US)
|
| Network Topology |
Star (device → base station → cloud) |
Star-of-stars (device → gateway → network server → cloud)
|
| Ownership |
Operator-managed (public network) |
Public or private gateways
|
| Protocol |
Ultra-narrowband |
LoRa modulation + LoRaWAN MAC
|
| Typical Range |
3–10 km urban, 10–50 km rural |
0.5–2 km urban, 2–15 km rural
|
| Indoor Coverage |
Moderate |
Good, depends on gateway placement
|
| Infrastructure Needed |
Base stations operated by Sigfox |
1–2 gateways per farm/field usually sufficient
|
| Max Payload per Message |
12 bytes |
51–242 bytes (depends on settings)
|
| Max Messages per Day |
~140 |
Hundreds (depends on duty cycle & spreading factor)
|
| Latency |
High / asynchronous |
Low to moderate (depends on class: A/B/C)
|
| Device Battery Life |
5–10 years (ultra-low power) |
5–10 years (ultra-low power)
|
| Duty Cycle |
Very low |
Flexible, can handle more frequent messages
|
| Network Cost |
Subscription fee per device |
One-time gateway cost + optional server
|
| Flexibility |
Limited to Sigfox network |
Can deploy private networks; mix public/private
|
| Scalability |
Limited by network policies |
Scales well for thousands of devices per gateway
|
| Best Fit |
Very low-frequency sensor updates, minimal infrastructure |
Large-scale farms or water networks, more frequent updates, private control
|
