Smart-Industrial - Andrea Finardi Iot simulations with Cisco Packet Tracer

69
Network Layout
Network layout was more complex compared to the previously analyzed examples, phys-
ical separation of the networks, achieved by creating separate physical containers, was
required due to the logic of the exercise.
Network topology was divided in five main sub-networks: two where IoT devices produc-
ing and storing
electricity were connected, one for
the corporate office building, one
where IoT device that utilized electricity were located and last one for overall IoT control.
All these networks were interconnected to each other by a central core router located in
the IoT control network. This non-redundant layout might not be suitable for real life in-
dustrial applications, however it helped to simplify the Cisco Packet Tracer exercise.
Figure 52
– Smart-Industrial network topology
The simplest network was the corporate office building LAN. Network consisted in a main
router connected to the central router and a local office switch. PCs and office DHCP
server were also connected to the local switch.
70
By network design, none of the office PCs were able to reach the IoT homepage or any
of the IoT devices. Intention in fact was to isolate and restrict the access to control IoT
device for only authorized user physically connected to the IoT control network.
Sea and Land were the two networks where IoT device producing electricity were con-
nected, both of these LANs were connected to the central core router.
Land was a switch-based network utilized to simulate the functioning
of a solar panel
farm, where electricity was produced and stored in smart IoT batteries.
In order to simplify the design only straight copper cables have been used to connect the
IoT devices to the switch. In a real life case optic or wireless technology might be pre-
ferred to overcome the communication distance limit dictated by the copper cabling.
Within the same network a DHCP server was installed in order to distribute local IPs to
device connected to the land network.
The Sea network was conceptually similar to the land network, in fact, also in this case,
IoT wind turbines were producing electricity then stored in batteries. As in the previous
network also a traditional switch, connected to the main core router, was utilized, how-
ever main connectivity to IoT wind turbines was provided by 3G.
The 3G cellular network was used to differentiate the setup, giving the possibility to stu-
dents to familiarize with different types of network, but also to give a more realistic
aspect
of a network over a sea.
As explained in the previous Smart-Home 2 SaaS example, due to the 3G network, ad-
ditional equipment must be installed. An antenna was
required in order to provide, via a
predefined APN, connectivity to the turbines. A central-office server component was also
necessary in order to consolidate the
signal from the cell towers,
coming via coaxial
cable, to Ethernet. Central-office server was then connected to the land network switch.
As in the previous setup also in the sea network a DHCP server was installed in order to
propagate IPs to the IoT devices.
The fourth, and less complex, network was the IoT industrial WLAN. This simple network
was providing wireless connectivity to the IoT devices that were draining power from the
IoT batteries located in the sea and land network. Wireless signal was created by a local
WLAN router connected to the central core router.
The last, but most important network, was the IoT control LAN.
71
Purpose of the networks was to be the main connection point between other WLANs and
LAN, but also to conceptually work as main control room for the IoT devices.
All IoT devices were in fact remotely connected to the IoT server
hosted in the IoT control
LAN. Heart of this grid was the core routers. As device was the central connection
point
additional NIC cards were needed in order to be able to connect all the other sub-net-
works.
RIP routing protocol also played a key role in the simulation, enabling the possibility for
the IoT remote devices to connect to the IoT Server. As previously explained RIP is a
very old but simple routing protocol that, because of its setup simplicity, was chosen to
be used in the IoT automations.
Other than the IoT server also a WLAN router was connected to the core router, providing
WLAN connection to the control room PCs and to two smart-devices that simulated an
intrusion detection system.