The Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) set of standards allows to support on the same channel the different kinds of traffic flows that are typically found in automotive scenarios. This article proposes the introduction of online Earliest Deadline First-based scheduling in TSN to provide support for event-driven real-time traffic. The proposed approach, called Deadline-TSN, is an online approach, and therefore, unlike other approaches in the literature, it does not require complex offline schedule calculations. Moreover, Deadline-TSN is able to uniformly deal with real-time periodic and event-driven traffic flows. This article presents Deadline-TSN and provides both worst-case response time analysis and simulative assessments in realistic automotive scenarios.

Automated driving requires correct perception of the surrounding environment in any driving condition. To achieve this result, not only are many more sensors than in current Advanced Driver Assistant Systems (ADAS) needed, but such sensors are also of different types, such as radars, ultrasonic sensors, LiDARs, and video cameras. Given the high number of sensors and the bandwidth requirements of some of them, high-bandwidth automotive-grade networks are required. Ethernet technology is a suitable candidate, as it offers a broad selection of automotive-grade Ethernet physical layers, with transmission speeds ranging from 10 Mbps to 10 Gbps. In addition, the Time-Sensitive Networking (TSN) family of standards offers several features for Ethernet-based networks that are suitable for automotive communications, such as high reliability, bounded delays, support for scheduled traffic, etc. In this context, this paper provides an overview of Ethernet-based in-car networking and discusses novel trends and future developments in automotive communications.

Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks (IWSNs) are found in many application domains that require low latency, robustness, and determinism. The IEEE 802.15.4 standard is not able to cope with the requirements of these applications. For this reason, the IEEE 802.15.4e amendment was introduced, which provides novel MAC-layer profiles that are optimized for a broad range of application domains, including process automation. This paper focuses on two of these profiles, i.e., the Deterministic and Synchronous Multi-channel Extension (DSME) and the Time Slotted Channel Hopping (TSCH). The aim of the paper is twofold. First, assessing their behavior in realistic process automation scenarios. Second, comparing their performance in terms of end-to-end delay, reliability and scalability. The ultimate aim of the work is identifying the limits of those protocols, thus paving the way to further work addressing suitable approaches to tackle them.

Low-Power Wide-Area Networks (LPWANs) are emerging as appealing solutions for several Internet of Things (IoT) applications, such as healthcare, smart cities and Industry 4.0, thanks to their ease of deployment, low energy consumption and large coverage range. LoRaWAN is one of the most successful LPWAN standards, as it supports robust long-distance communications using low-cost devices. To comply with the ETSI regulations, LoRaWAN can adopt as medium access control (MAC) layer either a pure ALOHA approach with duty-cycle limitations or a polite spectrum access technique, such as Listen Before Talk (LBT). The two approaches have their pros and cons that need to be carefully evaluated. The studies in the literature that so far have addressed an evaluation of MAC protocols for LoRaWAN refer to a previous and now obsolete version of the ETSI regulations, therefore they do not take into account the current limits on the timing parameters for polite spectrum access, such as that maximum time an end-node is allowed to be transmitting per hour. For this reason, the contribution of this work is two-fold. First, the paper discusses the restrictions that the current ETSI regulations impose on some timing parameters of the two kinds of MAC protocols for LoRaWAN. Second, the paper provides comparative performance assessments of the two protocols through simulations in realistic scenarios under different workload conditions.