Peer Reviewed Online International Journal Volume 1, Issue 1, May 2014 191

A Novel Approach to Neighbor Discovery in

Wireless Ad Hoc Networks


Gahan A V
Dept of Telecommunication Engineering
Dayanand Sagar College of Engineering
Bangalore, India
gahan.av001@gmail.com

Manjula Devi T H
Dept of Telecommunication Engineering
Dayanand Sagar College of Engineering
Bangalore, India
thm0303@gmail.com



Abstract

Neighbor discovery (ND) is an introductory and essential
step for determining wireless ad hoc networks. A quick,
accurate, and time-optimized ND protocol has substantial
importance to later operations in wireless networks. Never-
theless, many existing protocols have high probabilities to
generate idle slots in their neighbor discovering procedure,
which expands the accomplishing period, and thus compro-
mises their performance. In this paper, we introduce a new
randomized protocol using Pre-Handshaking strategy in
Neighbor Discovery, to setup synchronous full duplex wire-
less ad hoc networks and half duplex networks.. We intro-
duce a pre-handshaking scheme in this FRIEND proto-col to
help each other node be aware of activities of its neighbor-
hood, importantly which helps reduce the probabilities of
generating idle slots and avoid collisions (CSMA/CA). In
addition, prove the effectiveness of FRIEND protocol by
simulations. We also compare with the FRIEND protocol
with other Neighbor Discovery protocol.

Keywords

Wireless Ad Hoc Networks, Neighbor Discovery and Full
Duplex Technology.

Introduction

Wireless ad hoc networks and sensor networks possess
generated substantial aid lately due to many applications
such as habitat supervising, environmental observance, sur-
veillance and tagging, and community networking. For illus-
trate, instantly after preparation, a node has no information
of other nodes in its transmission range and demands to dis-
cover its neighboring nodes in govern to expeditiously
communicate with other nodes in the network. Information
of one-hop neighbors is necessitated by medium access con-
trol protocols, routing algorithms, and topology control algo-
rithms. Thus, neighbor discovery is one of the initial steps in
the form of a huge wireless network. Neighbor discovery
algorithms can be categorized into two categories, viz. ran-
domized or deterministic. The increase technology of wire-
less transmissions and the quality of portable computing
devices have made the ambition. An ad hoc wireless net-
work comprises of a set of mobile hosts operating without
the assistance of an established structure of centralized ad-
ministration. Communication is behaved by wireless links
between mobile hosts through their antennas. Due to pertain
such as radio power restriction and channel usage, a mobile
host may not be able to communicate directly with other
hosts in a single-hop fashion.

Our fundamental thought is twofold. On one side, we in-
sert a prehandshaking scheme to assist each node be con-
scious of actions of its locality earlier convention transmis-
sions, such that the system can have higher chances to pre-
vent collisions and idle slots. To carry on this prehandshak-
ing, we contribute some small sub-slots ahead of each nor-
mal slot. With the assistance of full-duplex technology, at
each sub-slot, all nodes will determine whether to transmit
the discovery message in a normal slot by transmitting an
anonymous polling signal and overhear its neighbors sig-
nals at the same time. With unlike transmittingreceiving
scenarios, we aim an efficient scheme for each node to find
out how to act in normal slots. Correspondingly, we attribute
the actions of each node in the normal slots to finish the ND
process. On the other hand, the reception condition feedback
performance is improved by using full-duplex wireless radi-
os. In the first place, in, a sub-slot is added after the normal
International Journal of Innovatory Research in Engineering and Technology IJIRET www.ijirusa.webs.com


Peer Reviewed Online International Journal Volume 1, Issue 1, May 2014 192
slot, and receivers will afford feedback signals to transmit-
ters in this sub-slot. In our purpose, this overhead can be
taken off by utilizing full-duplex nodes.

In this paper, we have aimed a prehandshaking ND proto-
col FRIEND by contributing prehandshaking sub-slots ahead
of the traditional slots. Moreover, we enforced full-duplex
technology and applied it to carry on prehandshaking with
novel feedback mechanisms. We examined the anticipated
value and the upper limit of ND processing period theoreti-
cally and formalized our analysis by simulation equated with
the ALOHA-like protocol suggested. Both theoretical style
and simulations proved that FRIEND significantly diminish-
es the time required to complete the ND process. Further-
more, we talked about some implementation consequences
and extensions of FRIEND and demonstrated that the half-
duplex counterpart of FRIEND, i.e., HD-FRIEND, also im-
portantly reduces time consumption.

Network Model and Assumptions

Here, we bring in the network model and various assump-
tions, underneath which we will present our prehandshaking
protocol and representing analysis. These assumptions are
sensible in the research on ND.

Each node has a unique ID
All nodes are in a clique of size n.
Nodes use Omni-directional antennas, and all nodes
have the same transmission range
No MPR technique is used, i.e., for a node that is
receiving, a collision occurs when two or more
nodes simultaneously transmit packets to it in a
slot.

Prehandshaking Protocol: FRIEND

Here, we present our novel protocol Prehandshaking
based on the assumptions in Section 2 and study its perfor-
mance theoretically. Initially, we add one tiny sub-slot in
front each normal slot and finish the design for the prehand-
shaking process. Next, we extend our idea for the prehand-
shaking process by bringing in more sub-slots before the
normal slot and design the corresponding variation of proto-
col.

As mentioned in Section I, for each normal slot, we bring
in a sub-slot before it to execute the prehandshaking process.
We name this combination as iteration. As mentioned in
Section I, for each normal slot, we bring in a sub-slot before
it to execute the prehandshaking process. We name this
combination as iteration. Let GR be the greeting process and
TR be the transmission process in one iteration (full frame).
We consider that the length of a sub-slot can be 1 bit, since
we do not have concern what a node transmits and only in-
tension is to know whether the signals exist or not. Vasude-
van et al. [2] also followed this assumption. Let Ms be such
kind of messages, which means an unknown election signal
with short period.



Fig.1 Description of Iterative

Let us describe the main idea of PHED-GR: the prehand-
shaking process. At the commencing of a sub-slot, each node
should find out its activity in the following normal slot. The
aim is to find a subset of nodes in the network to send Md
without collisions. Algorithm 1 describes the details of
PHED-GR. Mention that each node should run a copy of
PHED-GR. To simplify our description, presume that we run
PHED-GR on node A. We know that Ms is the election sig-
nal and that Md is the discovery message. Defining Af as a
flag variable to say whether A has successfully transmitted
discovery message (Md). If Af = 0, then A has to send Md
successfully in one of the iterations; otherwise, A will keep
silent and only receive messages. Initially, Af = 0. Define An
as the number of undiscovered neighbors of A. Initially, An
should be n 1 and we let An = n.

Algorithm 1: FRIEND-GR (Pre-handshaking)
1: If Af = 1 then > A has successfully sent Md.
2: A will keep silent in TR and exit.
3: end if
4: Node A to send Ms by pr(1/An)
5: if A sends Ms then > A hopes to send Md in TR.
6: if A does not receive Ms during GR then
7: A will transmit Md in TR;
8: else > A receives Ms from other nodes
9: A will send Md in TR by pr(1/2).
10: end if
11: else > A does not send Ms
12: if A does not receive Ms during GR then
13: A will transmit Md in TR by probability 1/An;
14: else > A receives Ms from other nodes
15: A will keep silent in TR.
16: end if
17: end if
18: Receive Ms Signal and mark the active sending nodes
19: Find the node, which is having lower index
20: Assign priority to that node

International Journal of Innovatory Research in Engineering and Technology IJIRET ww.ijirusa.webs.com
Peer Reviewed Online International Journal Volume 1, Issue 1, May 2014 193
In FRIEND-GR, each node resolves to send Ms with
probability 1/An or keep silent by probability 1 1/An. We
now come across two scenarios as follows.
1) If A sends Ms, it involves that A trusts to send Md in TR.
a) At this instant, if A does not receive Ms during GR, it
means that A wins the poll and transmits Md in the follow-
ing TR.
b) If A receives Ms, it intends that there survive other candi-
dates within As direct communication range. Therefore, A
can only send Md by probability 1/2.
2) If A does not send Ms, it means that A hopes to keep silent
in the TR.
a) At this instant, if A does not receive Ms in GR, it intends
that no nodes decide to send Md in TR. A will consider send-
ing Md by probability 1/An.
b) If A receives Ms, it means that there are nodes aiming to
transmit, and thus, A will keep silent. When FRIEND-GR is
completed, we enter the TR and start the process of neighbor
discovering. Next, we run FRIEND-TR, the neighbor dis-
covering procedure, and the detailed description is shown in
Algorithm 2.

Algorithm 2: FRIEND TR (Neighbor Discovery)
1: if A plans to send Md then
2: A sends Md and monitors the channel meanwhile.
3: if A does not receive Md during TR then
4: Af = 1.> A will keep silent from now on
5: else > A receives Md from other nodes
6: Current iteration is invalid.
7: end if
8: else > A does not plan to send Md
9: A keeps listening.
10: if A does not receive Md during TR then
11: Current iteration is invalid.
12: else if A receives a single Md then
13: Record the ID in Md.
14: An = An 1. _ A records one of its neighbors.
15: else > There is a collision at A
16: Current iteration is invalid.
17: end if
18: end if

In FRIEND-TR, there are two scenarios as follows.
1) If A does not receive Md during TR, it intends that As
transmission is successful. Accordingly, A will keep silent
during the rest of the neighbor discovery process.
a) If A receives Md from other nodes, it intends that the cur-
rent transmission is not successful.
b) If A does not send Md, A will check the number of trans-
mitters.
2) If A does not receive Md during TR, it intends that no
nodes send Md in TR. Therefore, the current iteration is in-
valid.
a) If A receives a single Md during TR, it means that there is
one node successfully transmitting its Md. A will record the
ID in Md and decrease the value of An by 1.
b) If there is a collision at A, it means that the current trans-
mission failed.

To further enhance the productive transmission probability,
we insert multiple sub-slots in GR before TR in one itera-
tion. Thus, we add more sub-slots to reduce this probability.
We now give FRIEND-tGR (t 2) with t sub-slots in GR
and describe it in Algorithm 3. This Algorithm is called re-
cursive protocol.

Algorithm 3: FRIEND tGR (Multiple prehandshaking)
1: if {At = t} then > FRIEND-tGR has run t times.
2: A will keep silent in TR and exit.
3: else > Still processing in t sub-slots
4: At = At + 1.
5: end if
6: if {Af = 1} then > A has successfully sent Md before.
7: A will keep silent in TR and exit.
8: end if
9: A to send Ms by pr(1/An).
10: if A sends Ms then
11: if A does not receive Ms during GR then
12: A will transmit Md in TR;
13: else >A receives Ms from other nodes
14: A will transmit Md in TR by probability 1/2.
15: end if
16: else > A does not send Ms
17: if A does not receive Ms during GR then
18: Call FRIEND-tGR and exit.
19: else > A receives Ms from other nodes
20: A will keep silent in TR.
21: end if
22: end if

For nodes with half-duplex radios, although nodes cannot
be made aware of other nodes actions during their own
transmissions, we can still use the similar strategy to reduce
the probability of generating idle slots. We call it HD-
FRIEND, which means the half-duplex counterpart of
FRIEND.

Algorithm 4 HD-FRIEND-GR (Half Duplex)
1: if Af = 1 then _ A has successfully sent Md.
2: A will keep silent in TR (and FB) and exit.
3: end if
4: Node A decides to sendMs by probability 1/An and keep
listening by probability 1 1/An.
5: if A sends Ms then _ A hopes to send Md in TR.
6: A will transmit Md in TR;
7: else _ A does not send Ms
8: if A does not receive Ms during GR then
9: A will transmit Md in TR by probability 1/An;
10: else _ A receives Ms from other nodes
11: A will keep silent in TR.
12: end if

We can see the main difference in GR from the given
algorithm. If a node intends to transmit in TR, it will send
Ms
International Journal of Innovatory Research in Engineering and Technology IJIRET www.ijirusa.webs.com


Peer Reviewed Online International Journal Volume 1, Issue 1, May 2014 194
in GR to notify other nodes and send Md in TR, regardless
of other nodes actions. Receiving nodes behave the same
way as they are in FRIEND. in the FB sub slot.

Algorithm 5 HD-FRIEND-TR (Half Duplex)
1: if A plans to send Md then
2: A sends Md.
3: A will keep listening in FB.
4: else _ A does not plan to send Md
5: A keeps listening.
6: if A does not receive Md during TR then
7: Current iteration is invalid.
8: else if A receives a single Md then
9: Record the ID in Md.
10: An = An 1. _ A records one of its neighbors.
11: else _ There is a collision at A
12: A will send a feedback signal in FB.
13: end if
14: end if

Algorithm 6 HD-FRIEND-FB (Half Duplex)
1: if A transmitted in TR then
2: A keeps listening in FB.
3: if A receives FB signal.
4: then Current iteration is invalid.
5: else
6: Af = 1.
7: end if
8: else _ A received in TR
9: if A plans to send a feedback signal in FB then
10: Send the feedback signal.
11: end if
12: end if


Simulation Results

Simulations of the performance comparison were imple-
mented using MATLAB. We simulate the random actions
that nodes may choose to take in a slot, according to the cor-
responding probabilities. A Graphical user interface (GUI) is
used to analyze the results easily.Fig.2 Shows the GUI win-
dow of the protocol.



Fig.2 GUI window




Fig.3 Comparison graph of Birthday Protocol with 1-
GR and 3-GR.

Fig.3 Shows the Comparison graph of Birthday Protocol
with 1-GR and 3-GR. Hence by running this algorithm with
10 nodes in a three GR slot mode is more efficient than sin-
gle GR slot mode, which helps in time optimization of the
Neighbor Discovery.

Conclusion and Future Work

In this paper, we have proposed a prehandshaking ND
protocol by introducing prehandshaking sub-slots before the
normal slots. Moreover, we applied full-duplex technology,
half duplex technology and used it to carry on prehandshak-
ing with new feedback mechanisms. The simulations proved
that this protocol importantly decreases the time needed to
finish the ND process.

In the future, we would like to evaluate the performance
of protocol by test bed experiments. We also want to consid-
er more realistic models, e.g. nodes with MPR techniques,
and asynchronous models.

Acknowledgments

The authors are thankful to IJIR Journal for the support to
develop this document.

References

[1] Guobao Sun, FanWu, Xiaofeng Gao, Guihai Chen, and
Wei Wang, Time-Efficient Protocols for Neighbor Discov-
ery in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks in Proc. ACM MobiCom,
2013, pp. 216222.

International Journal of Innovatory Research in Engineering and Technology IJIRET ww.ijirusa.webs.com
Peer Reviewed Online International Journal Volume 1, Issue 1, May 2014 195
[2] S. Vasudevan, D. Towsley, D. Goeckel, and R. Khalili,
Neighbor discovery in wireless networks and the coupon
collectors problem, in Proc. ACM MobiCom, 2009, pp.
181192.

[3] J. I. Choi, M. Jain, K. Srinivasan, P. Levis, and S. Katti,
Achieving single channel, full duplex wireless communica-
tion, in Proc. ACM MobiCom, 2010, pp. 112.

[4] M. Jain, J. I. Choi, T. M. Kim, D. Bharadia, S. Seth, K.
Srinivasan, P. Levis, S. Katti, and P. Sinha, Practical, real-
time, full duplex wireless, in Proc. ACM MobiCom, 2011,
pp. 301312.

[5] W. Zeng, X. Chen, A. Russell, S. Vasudevan, B. Wang,
and W. Wei, Neighbor discovery in wireless networks with
multipacket reception, in Proc. ACM MobiHoc, 2011, p. 3.

[6] R. Khalili, D. Goeckel, D. Towsley, and A. Swami,
Neighbor discovery with reception status feedback to
transmitters, in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2010, pp. 19.

[7] S. A. Borbash, A. Ephremides, and M. J. McGlynn, An
asynchronous neighbor discovery algorithm for wireless
sensor networks, Ad Hoc Netw., vol. 5, no. 7, pp. 998
1016, Sep. 2007.

[8] L. You, Z. Yuan, P. Yang, and G. Chen, ALOHA-like
neighbor discovery in low-duty-cycle wireless sensor net-
works, in Proc. IEEE WCNC, 2011, pp. 749754.

[9] X. An, R. Venkatesha Prasad, and I. Niemegeers, Im-
pact of antenna pattern and link model on directional neigh-
bor discovery in 60 GHz networks, IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun., vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 14351447, May 2011.

[10] R. Cohen and B. Kapchits, Continuous neighbor dis-
covery in asynchronous sensor networks, IEEE/ACM
Trans. Netw., vol. 19, no. 1, pp. 6979, Feb. 2011.

[11] A. Keshavarzian and E. Uysal-Biyikoglu, Energy-
efficient link assessment in wireless sensor networks, in
Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2004, pp. 17511761.

[12] D. Angelosante, E. Biglieri, andM. Lops, Neighbor
discovery in wireless networks: A multiuser-detection ap-
proach, in Proc. Inf. Theory Appl. Workshop, 2007, pp. 46
53.

[13] Z. Zhang and B. Li, Neighbor discovery in mobile ad
hoc selfconfiguring networks with directional antennas: Al-
gorithms and comparisons, IEEE Trans. Wireless Com-
mun., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 15401549, May 2008.

[14] N. Karowski, A. Viana, and A. Wolisz, Optimized
asynchronous multichannel neighbor discovery, in Proc.
IEEEINFOCOM, 2011, pp. 536540.

[15] G. Jakllari, W. Luo, and V. Krishnamurthy, An inte-
grated neighbor discovery and MAC protocol for ad hoc
networks using directional antennas, IEEE Trans. Wireless
Commun., vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 11141024, Mar. 2007.

[16] R. Motwani and P. Raghavan, Randomized Algorithms.
Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995.

[17] P. Erds and A. Rnyi, On a classical problem of
probability theory, Magyar Tud. Akad. Mat. Kutato Int.
Kozl, vol. 6A, pp. 215220, 1961.

[18] L. Kong, L. Fu, X. Liu, and M.Wu, Accelerating ini-
tialization for sensor networks, in Proc. IEEE
GLOBECOM, 2009, pp. 16.


[19] S. Yoon, C. Veerarittiphan, and M. L. Sichitiu, Tiny-
sync: Tight time synchronization for wireless sensor net-
works, ACM Trans. Sens. Netw., vol. 3, no. 2, p. 8, Jun.
2007.

[20] K. B. Rasmussen, S. Capkun, and M. Cagalj, SecNav:
Secure broadcast localization and time synchronization in
wireless networks, in Proc. ACM MobiCom, 2007, pp. 310
313.

[21] M. Poturalskim, P. Papadimitratos, and J. Hubaux, Se-
cure neighbor discovery in wireless networks: Formal inves-
tigation of possibility, in Proc. ASIACCS, 2008, pp. 189
200.

Biographies

Mr. Gahan A V is currently pursuing
M.Tech in Department of Telecommu-
nication Engineering, Dayand Sagar
college of Engineering, VTU, Banga-
lore, India. He received the B.E., Degree
in Electronics and Communication En-
gineering at Bangalore Institute of Technology from VTU,
in 2012. His area of interests is Networking, Cryptography
and Image Processing.

Prof. Manjula Devi T H is an Associate
Professor in Department of Telecommuni-
cation Engineering. She has received her
M. E., from UVCE, Bangalore, India and
has a working experience of 23 years. Her
area of interest is Image Processing, Net-
working and DSP.