D Edge computing technological innovation, Lower variety of infrastructure components desired (straightforward ring topology) Low quantity of infrastructure elements required (basic ring topology), Conventional redundancy protocol out there in most industrial network switches Reduced variety of infrastructure parts essential (simple ring topology), Normal redundancy protocol available in most industrial network switches, Reasonably uncomplicated to configure Drawbacks Requires a high number of infrastructure components (cabling and switches) and specialized switches supporting PRP technology Single-link failure, necessitates specialized switches supporting HSR engineering during the whole ring Single-link failure, Delayed recovery time, GLPG-3221 Purity communication latency Single-link failure, Delayed recovery time, Communication latencyHSR-based prototypeMRPRSTPFrom Table three, we recognize the standalone redundancy protocols RSTP and MRP are not suitable for time-critical applications due to the delayed recovery time as well as the communication latency which have been unacceptable in these applications. Other research that integrate zero-loss redundancy protocols like Xu, B. et al. (2021) [38] don’t give a solution to prevent the low-latency communication as a consequence of higher data volume (especially in an IIoT environment). Our AAPK-25 site proposed network communication prototypes mix zero-loss redundancy protocols, TSN, and edge computing to palliate these shortcomings and offer you more trustworthy industrial communication networks. five. Conclusions In this exploration, we designed two productive IP-based network communication prototypes to fix the demanding needs of a highly secure and dependable network for IIoT time-critical applications. We integrated the operational ideas of zero-loss redundancy protocols PRP and HSR to produce robust protection towards network downtime resulting from hyperlink and network products failures. Our PRP-based communication prototype, specifically, provides network safety towards many link failures. The outcomes segment compares our proposed prototype capabilities to two available standalone redundancy protocols: MRP and RSTP. Despite the fact that the two present protocols seem simple to apply in network switches and need much less network infrastructure, they cannot meet zero-loss recovery time during link failures and are thus unfit for IIoT time-critical applications. On top of that, these two standalone redundancy protocols are only ideal for a single stage of failure, as opposed to our PRP-based prototype. Our proposed answer goes a phase further by integrating latest state-of-the-art communication technologies like TSN and edge computing to cut back communication latency risks throughout information transmission. The result segment also demonstrates the significance of implementing TSN-capable switches in the communication network by estimating the frame transmission time with and with out TSN capabilities. The use of TSN in network switches lessens the affect of pointless delays as a consequence of external things including additional frame storage time in switches buffers. Although most previous researches provide option enhancement on either the physical network segment (redundancy safety schemes) or its application segment (data transmission enhanced programs), the blend of zero-loss redundancy protocols with TSN and edge computing advised by our communication prototypes creates an efficient and really reputable communication prototype. For potential functions, we expect to investigate thorough configurations and platforms requir.