y and large, the current power grid is defined as a
system made of electrical generators, transformers,
transmission, and distribution lines used to deliver electricity power to eventual users. Smart grid net- work control and monitoring are very important features in order to provide distributed generation and storage [1], quali- ty of service (QoS) [2, 3], and security [1, 4]. Nevertheless, most of these functions are currently only carried out at high voltage. In recent years, international organizations, govern- ments, utilities, and standardization organizations have become increasingly aware of the need for grid modernization [5]. The future smart grid must be distinguished by its self- healing and automation features, taking into account that it should support thousands of clients and energy providers. Smart grids must be understood as complex networks of intelligent electronic devices (IEDs), wired and wireless sen- sors, smart meters [6], distributed generators, and dispersed loads that require cooperation and coordination in order to play their expected role [2, 3]. Needless to say, information and communication technologies (ICTs), trust management, and technological integration also play an essential role in this scenario [1]. In this article, a heterogeneous communication paradigm based on the requirements of the smart grid network [7] is proposed in order to support smart grid applications. This communication paradigm achieves end-to-end integration of heterogeneous technologies by using the ubiquitous sensor network (USN) architecture [8] and defining the interoper- ability with the next-generation network (NGN) as the smart grid backbone [9]. The framework design must include a decentralized middleware that has to coordinate all the smart grid functions [3] (Fig. 1). This article is organized as follows. First, we introduce smart grid fundamental topics, and describe the communica- tions and QoS requirements of smart grids. Second, we dis- cuss our proposal of a smart grid communication architecture based on International Telecommunication Union (ITU) USNs plus NGNs. Then we present the adaptation of the smart grid communication architecture to the new communi- cation paradigm proposed in this article. Finally, we conclude and provide further work. Components and Communication Requirements The change toward the so-called smart grid promises to change the whole business model, and this concerns utilities, regulation entities, service providers, technology suppliers, and electricity consumers. The smart grid requires a broad array of requirements that are different from those of other types of networks; for example, very high availability together with low latency. This transformation toward an intelligent network is possible by importing the philosophy, concepts, and technologies from the Internet context [15]. According to the definition in the Strategic Deployment Document (SDD) of the European SmartGrids Technology Platform, a smart grid is an electricity network that can intelligently integrate the actions of all users connected to it (generators, consumers, and those that do both) in order to efficiently deliver sustain- able, economic, and secure electricity supplies. First and foremost, the main component of the smart grid is the sensor network, which consists of a system of distributed sensor nodes that interact among themselves and with the IEEE Network September/October 2011 30 0890-8044/11/$25.00 2011 IEEE B B Agustin Zaballos, Alex Vallejo, and Josep M. Selga, University Ramon Llull Abstract The smart grid concept provides a solution to the growing recognition that current utility grids need an ICT deployment infrastructure based upgrade to allow millions of potential market players to operate and to cope with distributed generation, wide-area situational awareness, demand response, electric storage, and efficient electric transportation. Smart grid deployment is mainly about defining the neces- sary standards for ICT solutions. The design of the communication network associ- at ed wi t h t he smart gri d i nvol ves det ai l ed anal ysi s of i t s communi cat i on requirements, a proposal of the appropriate protocol architecture, the choice of the most suitable technologies for each case study, and a scheme for the resultant het- erogeneous network management system. Given the smart grid use cases, this arti- cle is focused on proposing a heterogeneous communication paradigm for smart grids based on power line communications and wireless networks. The proposal is related to the framework of the ITU ubiquitous sensor network architecture using the ITU next-generation network model. This architecture allows for better management of the QoS in the smart grid and should facilitate interoperability with other tech- nologies. Heterogeneous Communication Architecture for the Smart Grid ZABALLOS LAYOUT 9/12/11 12:39 PM Page 30 IEEE Network September/October 2011 31 infrastructure in order to acquire, process, transfer and pro- vide information extracted from the physical world. Sensor nodes could also have processing and routing capabilities using either a wireless or a wired medium. The processing of the sensor information should allow the modification of the electrical grid behavior through intelligent actuators. Another important smart grid component is the smart meter [6], which is the bridge between user behavior and power con- sumption metering. Moreover, an enhanced distribution man- agement system (DMS) is required in order to analyze, control and provide enough useful information to the utility. The smart grid is also composed of legacy remote terminal units (RTUs) that can perform sensor network gateway functions acting as intermediate points in the medium voltage network. The sensor network gateway is the bridge between the sensor network itself and the back-end system. Therefore, it provides wired/wireless interfaces to other sensor nodes as well as wired/wireless interfaces to existing ICT infrastructures. Advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) consists of smart meters, data management, communication network and appli- cations. AMI is one of the three main anchors of smart grids along with distributed energy resource (DER) and advanced distributed automation (ADA). Last but not least, a geo- graphic information system (GIS) and a consumer informa- tion system (CIS) usually contribute with tools and important processes. All the information recollected and processed by DMS must be reported to a supervisory control and data acquisition system (SCADA). Smart grid networks will manage real-time information and will collect information from established IEDs for control and automation purposes. This kind of data network is not exempt from the growing needs of QoS [2, 3]. Smart grids need to communicate many different types of devices, with different needs for QoS over different physical media. IEDs can have very different QoS necessities depending on the function car- ried out. For example, real-time communications are required in the case of fault detection, service restoration or quality monitoring; periodic communications are used in Automatic Meter Reading systems (AMR); bulk data transfers are useful to read logs and energy quality information [2, 3, 6]. The IEDs involved in these processes can be situated in dif- ferent locations due to the pursued decentralized architecture. For example, electrical substation elements are connected to the substations Ethernet network; sensors can be installed along electrical cables communicated through wireless sensor standards, for example based on IEEE 802.11s. Communica- tions from the control center to energy meters and between substations can be carried out via a high variety of technolo- gies such as narrowband power line communications (NB- PLC), Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS), general packet radio service (GPRS), broadband PLC (BPL), or WiMAX. Today, different standard communication protocols at vari- ous voltage levels and for different kinds of equipment are used. The medium and low voltage communication assets are characterized by economically limited ICT infrastructures. Therefore, standardized, open information models and com- munication services for all data exchanges are needed in this case. Due to these circumstances, smart grids will be support- ed by a highly heterogeneous data network with strict QoS constraints. One of the most important specifications required for smart grids is that which refers to necessary communica- tions. A framework for management of end-to-end QoS for all communications in the grid will be a must in the future. In fact, a suitable communication infrastructure enables the elec- tric system to increase its efficiency to a much greater extent than automation without communication capacities could ever do [7]. In this article, a communication paradigm based on IP is proposed for the smart grid, since it is the most widely used protocol for communications. Furthermore, several promising standards have recently appeared for smart grids that base their communications on IP. An appropriate starting point for further standards development would be the harmonization of IEC 61850 standards as they address communications for DER and ADA. Figure 1. Heterogeneous network integration. PHY layer PHY SAP MAC MAC SAP LLC Convergence layer Bridging PHY layer PHY SAP MAC MAC SAP LLC PHY layer WIMAX architecture Wireless sensor network (WSN) architecture Power line communication (PLC) reference model PHY SAP Privacy sublayer MAC CPS MAC SAP Service specific CS CS SAP Middleware functions: QoS, security, filtering, etc. IEEE 802.1x P L C
m a n a g e m e n t
p l a n e W S N
m a n a g e m e n t
p l a n e ZABALLOS LAYOUT 9/12/11 12:39 PM Page 31 IEEE Network September/October 2011 32 Smart Grid as an USN Nowadays, nearly each new application that is added to the power grid involves the deployment of a new ICT infrastruc- ture. As a consequence, there is a fragmented map of applica- tions and communications, which makes it difficult to improve the quality of supply and smart grid management in general. This fact usually results in the redundancy of infrastructure and functions in the grid. In this sense, one of the main objec- tives of smart grid development is to deploy a unique integrat- ed system through which all the applications can take advantage of the same strengths. Although a similar approach is being discussed in ITU Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T) Question 25/16, Framework of USN applications and services for smart metering (F.USN-SM) for AMI, to the best of our knowledge, our approach is the first proposal of a holistic net- work architecture based on USNs with the aim of integrating all the communications requested by smart grid applications in a single system. There are many applications that can use the USN, where information and knowledge are developed by using context awareness. They can be classified as [8]: Detection: for example, detection of temperatures exceeding a particular threshold, intruders, and brush fires Tracking: for example, the tracking of items in supply chain management, plug-in electrical vehicles (PEVs) in intelli- gent transport systems, and workers in dangerous work environments such as offshore platforms Monitoring: for example, monitoring of inhospitable envi- ronments such as volcanoes and the structural health of buildings Figure 2 shows our proposal of the schematic model of the smart grid USN. In fact, it is the adaptation of the ITUs USN model [8] to the smart grid context, using specific applications of this domain as USN work at ITU remains fairly generic at this stage. In the first level, there are different sensor net- works, which transmit and collect information regarding the surrounding environment. This information is collected by the Figure 2. Schematic layers of a USN architecture applied to the smart grid. USN access DMS AMI Distributed generation Demand response Supervision and vigilance Outage management Applications Sensor networks USN middleware NGN Gateway Gateway Gateway Gateway Gateway ZABALLOS LAYOUT 9/12/11 12:39 PM Page 32 IEEE Network September/October 2011 33 access network, which can facilitate communication with a control center or external entities. Then it is transported via a data network. This ICT infrastructure can be considered a new kind of access network from the point of view of the NGN model. Before reaching the applications, large volumes of data are collected and processed in the software called USN middleware. Finally, information reaches the application platform. The USN application level is a technology platform to enable the effective use of a USN in a particular industrial sector or application (e.g., real-time control and automation functions) [7]. Paradigm for Smart Grid Communication Architecture Smart Grids USN Access Network Level Along with the previously stated aspects, it is clear that the ICT infrastructure is crucial in the smart grid; notwithstand- ing, there is no single technology that can solve all the needs by itself. In this section, the candidate technologies for the smart grid communication network are presented, as well as the network management model based on USNs. Due to the nature of the power grid, PLC is apparently the most suitable technology for the communication network, especially when much of the smart grid infrastructure is underground or in enclosed places that are not readily acces- sible. However, as a technological option it presents some drawbacks, both technically and economically. For example, in North America, PLC-based AMI systems are generally not preferred because there are only one to three customers per transformer, so most PLC technologies for communications are deemed too costly, compared to Europe, where there are around 100300 customers per transformer [6, 7]. Thus, our proposal employs a combination of PLC and wireless tech- nologies. Access USN Baseline Technology PLC is a suitable candi- date technology for the USN sensor network, USN access net- work, and even for NGN [7]. This technology uses the power grid for transmitting data. It can be divided into BPL and NB- PLC. NB-PLC is being used for electric company communica- tions, meter reading [6], and home automation. NB-PLC usu- ally uses frequencies up to 150 kHz in Europe and 450 kHz in the United States, and delivers bit rates from 2 to 128 kb/s. On the other hand, BPL gives the opportunity to communi- cate at higher bit rates and can be used in in-home LANs and access networks [7]. Common nominal bandwidth values of BPL are from 10 to 300 Mb/s, although new systems are offer- ing higher bandwidths. The characteristics of the PLC medium make it especially difficult to ensure a given QoS. Some of the problems that PLC technology has to overcome are: unpredictable frequency and time dependence of impedance, attenuation and transmis- sion characteristics, impulse and background noise and their wide variability, limited bandwidth, and harmonic interfer- ence. The variability of the channel is especially troublesome for QoS because it can suddenly bring the bandwidth down. At the moment, there are several ongoing standardization processes for PLC. The IEEE standardization process by the P1901 working group is aimed at standardizing both in-home and access networks for seamless interaction with smart grid applications. On the other hand, Study Group 15 of the ITUs Standardization Sector is working in G.hn and G.hnem speci- fications. These standards will comprise home network and access network aspects. Besides PLC communication protocol, several access tech- nologies must be integrated into the resulting smart grid architecture. Each utility has its own communication policy, either subcontracting an Internet service provider (ISP) for its communications necessities or deploying a private network. Some easy options to integrate are briefly outlined in the fol- lowing: WIMAX (Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access): IEEE 802.16 is a standard technology for wireless wideband access. Among its advantages, the ease of instal- lation is by far the most important aspect. WIMAX sup- ports either point-to-multipoint or mesh topologies. In mesh topologies, it is not necessary that all the nodes are connected to the central node. In this way, active nodes periodically announce MSH-NCFG messages (mesh net- work configuration), which contain information about the Figure 3. Communications network proposed. CPE PLC (customer premises equipment) PLC repeater EMR CPE PLC HAN mesh network PLC in-home IEEE 802.15.4g HAN mesh network PLC in-home IEEE 802.15.4g EMR (electricity meters room) PPC (power protection cabinet) HE PLC (head end) Transformation centre CPE WiMAX / IEEE 802.22 To NGN ZABALLOS LAYOUT 9/12/11 12:39 PM Page 33 IEEE Network September/October 2011 34 base station identifier and the channel in use. IEEE 802.11s: A draft from IEEE 802.11 for mesh networks that defines how wireless devices can be connected to cre- ate ad hoc networks. The implementation should be over the physical layer in the IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n. A combina- tion of IEEE 802.11n and IEEE 802.11s could be also a feasible solution for USNs. IEEE 802.22: It uses the existing gaps in the TV frequency spectrum between 54 and 862 MHz. The development of this standard is based on the use of cognitive radio tech- niques in order to give broadband access in areas with low population and which are difficult to reach. USN Sensor Network Technology Most wireless traditional systems use point-to-point or point-to-multipoint technologies. Mesh networks are an alternative to these topologies. There are several reasons to think that a mesh network is appropri- ate for the smart grids sensor network [7]. Firstly, it is easy to add new nodes in the network thanks to the self-configuration and self-organization capabilities. Furthermore, a mesh net- work is a robust network as there will almost always be an alternative path to the destination. This links with the strin- gent requirements regarding reliability. Given the large scenario in which the smart grid is going to be deployed, different technologies will be needed in order to cover all the area. Some technologies based on IEEE 802.15.4 are presented as wireless communication candidate technolo- gies that work within mesh networks. IEEE 802.15.4: It defines the medium access control (MAC) and physical (PHY) layers in low-rate personal area net- works (LR-PANs). In 2008, the Smart Utility Networks (SUN) Task Group 4g (TG4g) was created within the 802.15 group. The role of TG4g is to define new physical layers to provide a global standard that facilitates very large scale process control applications such as the utility smart grid. IEEE 802.15.5: This is the WPAN mesh standard approved in March 2009. This working group was established in order to define a mesh architecture in PAN networks based on IEEE 802.15.4. There are different proposals regarding routing in LR-WPAN networks. Nevertheless, these algo- rithms are not fully optimal. In the upper layers, there may be communication protocols such as Zigbee or 6LoWPAN. The 6 Low-power Wireless Per- sonal Area Network (6LoWPAN) is a work group belonging to the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), which works over the methods that allow to use IPv6 protocol over the base of IEEE 802. 15. 4 in 30 kbytes of sensor memory. Although 6LoWPAN can work with different topologies, it normally works with mesh networks. On the other hand, Zig- bee specifies a bundle of high level communication protocols to be used in low consumption digital radio. It is also based on the IEEE 802.15.4 standard. Although ZigBee is not designed to work over IP, the ZigBee Alliance, through the ZigBee Smart Energy group, announced the ZigBee IP proto- col in order to fulfill the needs of the power market. Conclusions for the Smart Grid USN Figure 3 shows our proposal for the USN access and sensor communication net- works. Regarding metropolitan/wide area networks, wireless wide- band technology has been proposed for low populated areas due to its easy deployment. In this way, WIMAX will work from the core to the high/medium voltage substations and PLC from these substations up to the homes. With regard to the home area network (HAN), some suit- Figure 4. Extended NGN architecture with OSE. Policy enforcement OSE Application support functions and service support functions Core transport functions Edge functions Access functions Service user profiles UNI Media Access transport functions Media handling functions Gateway functions Interworking with service creation environment Service management Service stratum Other networks End-user functions NNI Transport functions ANI Transport user profiles NACF Transport stratum RACF Service control functions Service discovery Service development support Service registration Service composition Service coordination Transport control functions Other applications provider Control except OSE Management Control for OSE M a n a g e m e n t
f u n c t i o n s ZABALLOS LAYOUT 9/13/11 12:37 PM Page 34 IEEE Network September/October 2011 35 able technologies, such as 6LoWPAN, IEEE 802.15.5, and ZigBee, have been studied. ZigBee is the most currently extended and mature technology, and the one that has pre- sented the most smart grid related applications until now. Finally, the combination of PLC and ZigBee/IEEE 802.15.4g provides a new concept of home and substation automation with outside interaction. It has to be said that in some cases not all these elements will be present in the network, but all of them must be integrated into the policy base management. Smart Grids USN NGN Level For this purpose, ITU-T Recommendation Y.211 defines a generic end-to-end architecture for the QoS resource control in NGNs. The aim of this architecture is to provide QoS man- agement of new end-to-end services and multimedia commu- nications through diverse NGNs, even though enhancements of the functionalities to support advanced services are still being discussed. It is also important to mention the Open Ser- vice Environment (OSE) capabilities of ITUs NGN model [9] because OSE capabilities allow the creation of enhanced and flexible services based on the use of standard interfaces, as well as the reuse, portability, and accessibility of services (Fig. 4). According to ITU, an NGN is a packet-based network in which service-related functions are independent of the under- lying transport-related technologies. It supports generalized mobility, which will provide users with consistent and ubiqui- tous provision of services. The ITU architecture for the QoS resource control in NGNs has been developed summarizing the local efforts of different agents in their respective fields: the Third Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), DSL Forum, WiMAX Forum, and European Telecommunications Standards Institute Telecom and Internet Converged Ser- vices and Protocols for Advanced Networks (ETSI-TISPANs) generic access network architecture. The QoS control management is achieved by the central- ized management of QoS through policy-based network man- agement (PBNM) with protocols such as Common Open Policy Service for Provisioning (COPS-PR), from the Resource and Admission Control Functions entity (RACF) Figure 5. Middleware interaction. Open API USN middleware Sensor network directory service Substation monitoring Home and building monitoring Distributed generation monitoring Security manager Security manager Integrated conrtol centre Substation control and maintenance application Customer monitoring application Distributed generation control application GIS BBDD Sensor network common interface Sensor network monitor Security manager Context-aware rule engine Sensing data mining processor Event processor ZABALLOS LAYOUT 9/12/11 12:39 PM Page 35 IEEE Network September/October 2011 36 (Fig. 4). The RACF carries out the resource control of the transport subsystem within access and core networks. RACF uses reference points to manage the negotiated QoS through the session signaling and the flow control at a network level. Our NGN proposal for the smart grids USN is based on the use of ITU NGN architectures for the high-level manage- ment of the smart grids data network, including the accep- tance of traffic streams and QoS management [7]. Since the architecture has to work over a heterogeneous network, which consists of wireless and PLC nodes, the communication descriptors (e.g., QoS parameters or security constraints) must be mapped between these technologies in order to obtain suit- able end-to-end communications. This mapping scheme must be carried out by using, for example, our proposed communi- cation broker incorporated into the USN middleware [7]. The main advantage of the communication broker architec- ture for communication control is that the requester node simply needs to specify the parameters for the communication broker. Internetworking among different network technolo- gies is crucial, in both smart grids and NGNs, to support suit- able end-to-end communications. The communication broker function is aware of those mappings and decides whether the network has sufficient resources when a new request is gener- ated, and it can also reconfigure the intertechnology parame- ter mappings on demand. Smart Grids USN Middleware Level By definition, USNs NGN only performs data transport. However, due to the fact that ITUs NGN model has been chosen by the authors, it also performs additional functions. In our case, there are many common functions between the NGN and the middleware, particularly concerning NGNs Figure 6. Use of COSMOS messages in the AMR use case. Periodic readings are stopped Frequency Init. communication AMR application Middleware Sensor network ReqConnCtrl ConnResCtrl Continuous Cmd (Snid, frequency, time) CmdActionReq (command to stop, end) ConnReqCtrl SensingValue Rpt (Snid, kW, time) FinishRpt SensingValue Rpt (Snid, kW, time) FinishRpt CmdActionRes (result) (..........) (..........) AuthReqCtrl AuthResCtrl Authentication process Metering programming Early ending indication Electric consumption processing Electric consumption processing Result indication (..........) (..........) Frequency ZABALLOS LAYOUT 9/12/11 12:39 PM Page 36 IEEE Network September/October 2011 37 OSE capabilities. In fact, the middleware is a group of logical functions and business intelligence that can be implemented through the OSE. If the OSE does not include the appropri- ate function, it has to be independently implemented at the middleware level. Figure 5 shows an example of the process carried out when a smart grid application wants to reach the sensor network through the middleware in order to collect data. It is based on the scheme proposed in Fig. 2. It shows the architecture with the applications on the top, the proposed middleware model in the middle, and sensor networks at the bottom. According to the illustration, it appears that there are three active applications which work independently but which are controlled by a control center. If each application has direct access to the sensor network, each application developer should know the details of each sensor network and their interfaces. However, when using the USN middleware, each application developer only needs to know how to use the open application programming interface (API). All the appli- cations always have to communicate with the middleware and the middleware has to exchange information appropriately with sensor network. In this article, the reference chosen for the middleware is ETRISs Common System for Middleware of Sensor Net- works (COSMOS) [10], which is in its ITU standardization process. Figure 6 shows an example of a use case using COS- MOS interface between the middleware and the sensor net- work. The communication between the applications and the middleware is shown in a conceptual way, as it is carried out through the open API. The case shown in Fig. 6 is related to AMR. First, the connection and authentication process must conclude. Next, the AMR application configures periodic meter reading through the ContinuousCmd command. In this way, the sensor network will periodically send the energy con- sumption value to the middleware. In this process, the appli- cation can interrupt the programming introduced by issuing the CmdActionReq command. Conclusions This article provides a general but complete view of the cur- rent ICT status for smart grids. In essence, the smart grid is a totally automated energy transport network, which is able to guarantee bidirectional power and information flows among generation plants, final users, and applications inter alia. It goes without saying that the development of the smart grid will mean a drastic change in power use and administration. On one hand, customers will become active actors in energy management and will be able to control their consumption. Moreover, they will have new applica- tions, both inside and outside their homes, that will provide them with a higher quality of life. On the other hand, utili- ties will be able to control demand peaks and manage the grid efficiently, from generation to distribution. For these reasons, thei r communi cati on i nfrastructure must be improved. At the moment, the definition of smart grids is a key objective for many countries and many entities are focusing on it, such as the SmartGrids and IntelliGrid platforms, NIST, EPRI, and the IEEE. Standards of communication protocols, information representation models, modules interfaces, and processes are crucial if smart grids are to succeed. A communication paradigm architecture is present- ed in this article after its communication needs and require- ments have been anal yzed. When studyi ng ITU s USN concept and NGN, it is obvious that the need for interaction between different levels and the middleware should be met in order to unify network management. USN middleware has been extended for security, mobility, and QoS parame- ters negotiation and configuration in order to cooperate, in a dovetailed manner, with NGN management tools like NGN OSE. IP plus IEEE 802.15.4g-based sensor networks are pro- posed as the USN bottom level using a mesh configuration over heterogeneous technologies. PLC technology will play an important role in smart grid essential communications but has to be complemented by wireless communication protocols. The resulting communication architecture must be able to integrate whichever technology may be considered relevant by any smart grid actor. Internetworking between different net- work technologies is also very important. Heterogeneous net- work management is an active research area that must evolve in order to be applied in smart grids. In conclusion, several trends and technology designs have been clearly presented in this study of the problem. The most important consideration is that ITU USN/NGN have been successfully adapted and applied to smart grid communication architecture. This work allows us to create a unified ICT framework capable of comprehensibly supporting the strin- gent communication requirements of smart grids. Acknowledgment We would like to thank EU Seventh Framework Program project INTEGRIS (ICT-Energy-2009, number 247938) and La Salle (URL) for their support, especially L. Kinnear for the linguistic reviews of the article. References [1] A. Zaballos et al., Survey and Performance Comparison of AMR over PLC Standards, IEEE Trans. Power Delivery, vol. 24, no. 2, 2009, pp. 60413. [2] EPRI, D. Von Dollen, Report to NIST on the Smart Grid Interoperability Stan- dards Roadmap, 2009. [3] V. Pothamsetty and S. Malik, Smart Grid Leveraging Intelligent Communica- tions to Transform the Power Infrastructure, Cisco rep., 2009. [4] Y. Kim et al., A Secure Decentralized Data-Centric Information Infrastructure for Smart Grid, IEEE Commun. Mag., vol. 48, no. 11, 2010, pp. 5865. [5] A. R. Metke and R. L. Ekl, Security Technology for Smart Grid Networks, IEEE Trans. Smart Grids, vol. 1, 2010, pp. 99107. [6] T. M. Chen, Smart Grids, Smart Cities Need Better Networks, Editors Note, IEEE Network, vol. 24, no. 2, 2010, pp. 23. [7] INTEGRIS FP7 Project INTelligent Electrical Grid Sensor Communications ICT-Energy-2009 call (number 247938); http://fp7integris.eu. [8] ITU-T, Ubiquitous Sensor Networks (USN), ITU-T Technology Watch Briefing Report Series, no. 4, 2008. [9] ITU-T Rec. Y.2234, Open Service Environment Capabilities for NGN, 2008. [10] J. Wook Lee et al., COSMOS: A Middleware for Integrated Data Process- ing over Heterogeneous Sensor Networks, ETRI J., vol. 30, no. 5, 2008, pp. 696706. Biographies AGUSTIN ZABALLOS (zaballos@salle.url.edu) received his M.S. degree in electron- ics engineering from University Ramon Llull (URL), Barcelona, Spain, in 2000, where he is currently pursuing a Ph.D. degree in computer science. He has been an assistant professor in the Department of Computer Science at URL since 1999 and project manager of the R&D Networking Area since 2002. His research is focused on real-time routing protocols in smart grids and sensor networks. ALEX VALLEJO (avallejo@salle.url.edu) received his M.S. degree in electronics engineering from URL in 2001, and his Ph.D. degree in telecommunications engineering from URL in 2010. Currently, he is the manager director at Malpas IT and a part-time professor at URL. His research interests include the manage- ment of communication networks, smart grids, next-generation networks, and intelligent systems applied to networking systems. JOSEP M. SELGA (jmselga@salle.url.edu) received his M.S. degree from the Poly- technic University of Madrid, Spain, in 1971 and his Ph.D. degree in telecom- munications engineering from the Polytechnic University of Catalonia, Barcelona, Spain, in 1985. Currently, he is a professor at URL. He has been manager of Telecommunications and Control Systems of the power utilities ENHER and ENDESA, and President of the Technical/Regulatory Working Group of the PLC Forum. His main research interest is on computer networking and the smart grid. ZABALLOS LAYOUT 9/12/11 12:39 PM Page 37