Avaliando o Protocolo Matrix para Ecossistemas IoT com Recursos Restritos

• Rodrigo da Silva Carvalho Maia UFC https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0003-4873
• Paulo Antonio Leal Rego UFC https://orcid.org/0009-0004-0003-4873

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5753/sbrc_estendido.2026.23174

Resumo

Este estudo investiga a adaptação do protocolo federado Matrix, via gateway CoMatrix, para dispositivos IoT com recursos restritos, visando superar problemas de soberania de dados e pontos únicos de falha comuns em arquiteturas centralizadas. Testes comparativos com o protocolo MQTT demonstraram que o modelo híbrido CoAP-Matrix reduziu o tráfego de rede em 50.5% e estabilizou as latências na faixa de 200 ms, mitigando bloqueios em cenários de alta frequência. A arquitetura comprovou sua viabilidade técnica para aplicações resilientes, embora ainda exija adaptações para implantações em cenários reais.

Referências

Banks, A. and Gupta, R. (2014). MQTT version 3.1.1: OASIS standard. Technical report, OASIS. Disponível em: [link]. Acesso em: 2026-03-13.

Bormann, C., Ersue, M., and Keranen, A. (2014). Terminology for constrained-node networks. Technical Report RFC 7228, IETF.

Buchberger, T. and Kramer, I. (2021). CoMatrix: How to overcome kernel panic, deal with buffer limitations and LOL at random. In RIOT Summit 2021. Disponível em: [link].

Chataut, R., Phoummalayvane, A., and Akl, R. (2023). Unleashing the power of IoT: A comprehensive review of iot applications and future prospects in healthcare, agriculture, smart homes, smart cities, and industry 4.0. Sensors, 23(16):7194.

Datta, S. K. and Bonnet, C. (2021). Performance evaluation of CoAP and MQTT with security support for IoT environments. Computer Networks, 196:108201.

Hazra, A. et al. (2021). A comprehensive survey on interoperability for IIoT: Taxonomy, standards, and future directions. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(1):1–35.

Lee, E. et al. (2021). A survey on standards for interoperability and security in the internet of things. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 23(2):1020–1047.

Linagora (2025). Matrix protocol: Secure decentralised communication. Disponível em: [link]. Acesso em: 2026-03-12.

Martins, J. A., Rego, P. A., de Macêdo, J. A., Silva, F. A., and Lagrota, V. (2026). Matrix protocol: a comprehensive systematic mapping study. Journal of Cloud Computing, 15(1):20.

Matrix.org Foundation (2025). Matrix specification. Disponível em: [link]. Acesso em: 2026-03-11.

Naik, N. (2017). Choice of effective messaging protocols for iot systems: Mqtt, coap, amqp and http. In 2017 IEEE international systems engineering symposium (ISSE), pages 1–7. IEEE.

Profanter, S., Tekat, A., Dorofeev, K., Rickert, M., and Knoll, A. (2019). OPC UA versus ROS, DDS, and MQTT: Performance evaluation of Industry 4.0 protocols. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA).

Shahrokhi, A. and Ahmadi, M. (2023). Power evaluation of iot application layer protocols. In 2023 7th International Conference on Internet of Things and Applications (IoT), pages 1–7. IEEE.

Shelby, Z., Hartke, K., and Bormann, C. (2014). The constrained application protocol (CoAP). Technical Report RFC 7252, IETF.

Tanenbaum, A. S. and Wetherall, D. J. (2011). Computer Networks. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 5th edition.

Żatuchin, D. and Azarskov, M. (2025). An adaptive protocol selection framework for energy-efficient iot communication: Dynamic optimization through context-aware decision making. In Informatics, volume 12, page 125. MDPI.