Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Outline
1. Introduce
System architecture and design issues
2. Data-centric protocols
3. Hierarchical protocols
4. Location-based protocols
5. Network flow and QoS-aware protocols
6. Conclusion and open issues
1. Introduction
Routing in sensor networks is very challenging due to several
characteristics that distinguish them from contemporary
communication and wireless ad hoc networks.
First of all, it is not possible to build a global addressing
scheme for the deployment of sheer number of sensor
nodes.
Second, in contrary to typical communication networks
almost all applications of sensor networks require the ow
of sensed data from multiple regions (sources) to a
particular sink (command center).
1. Introduction (con.)
Third, generated data trac has signicant redundancy in
it since multiple sensors may generate same data within
the vicinity of a phenomenon.
Fourth, sensor nodes are tightly constrained in terms of
transmission power, on-board energy, processing capacity
and storage and thus require careful resource
management.
Due to such dierences, many new algorithms have been
proposed for the problem of routing data in sensor networks.
Node deployment
The deployment is either deterministic or self-organizing.
Energy considerations
Since the transmission power of a wireless radio is proportional to
distance squared or even higher order in the presence of obstacles,
multi-hop routing will consume less energy than direct
communication.
5
Node capabilities
In a sensor network, dierent functionalities can be associated
with the sensor nodes.
Data aggregation/fusion
Data aggregation is the combination of data from dierent
sources by using functions such as suppression (eliminating
duplicates), min, max and average.
2. Data-centric protocols
In data-centric routing, the sink sends queries to certain
regions and waits for data from the sensors located in the
selected regions.
However, data is usually transmitted from every sensor node
within the deployment region with signicant redundancy.
Since this is very inecient in terms of energy consumption,
routing protocols that will be able to select a set of sensor
nodes and utilize data aggregation during the relaying of data
have been considered.
10
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
19
20
3. Hierarchical protocols
The main aim of hierarchical routing is to eciently maintain
the energy consumption of sensor nodes
by involving them in multi-hop communication within a
particular cluster
by performing data aggregation and fusion in order to
decrease the number of transmitted messages to the sink
To allow the system to cope with additional load and to be
able to cover a large area of interest without degrading the
service, networking clustering has been pursued in some
routing approaches.
21
3.1. LEACH
Low-energy adaptive clustering hierarchy (LEACH) is one of
the most popular hierarchical routing algorithms for sensor
networks.
The idea is to form clusters of the sensor nodes based on the
received signal strength and use local cluster heads as routers
to the sink.
Cluster heads change randomly over time in order to balance
the energy dissipation of nodes.
23
24
25
26
27
29
30
32
33
34
Organization phase:
Groups are formed and merged by forming a hierarchy.
Maintenance phase:
Updating of routing tables and energy levels of nodes is made in
this phase.
Self-reorganization phase:
In case of partition or node failures, group reorganizations are
performed.
35
4. Location-based protocols
In most cases location information is needed in order to
calculate the distance between two particular nodes so that
energy consumption can be estimated.
Some of the protocols discussed here are designed primarily
for mobile ad hoc networks and consider the mobility of
nodes during the design.
37
38
39
40
41
4.2. GAF
GAF ( Geographic adaptive fidelity ) conserves energy by
turning o unnecessary nodes in the network without
aecting the level of routing delity.
It forms a virtual grid for the covered area. Each node uses its
GPS-indicated location to associate itself with a point in the
virtual grid.
Nodes associated with the same point on the grid are
considered equivalent in terms of the cost of packet routing.
There are three states dened in GAF.
discovery for determining the neighbors in the grid
active reecting participation in routing
sleep when the radio is turned o
42
43
44
4.3. GEAR
The protocol, namely geographic and energy-aware routing
(GEAR), uses energy aware and geographically informed
neighbor selection heuristics to route a packet towards the
target region.
In GEAR, each node keeps an estimated cost and a learning
cost of reaching the destination through its neighbors.
The estimated cost is a combination of residual energy and
distance to destination.
The learned cost is a renement of the estimated cost that
accounts for routing around holes in the network.
45
46
47
48
5.1. SAR
Sequential assignment routing (SAR) is the rst protocol for
sensor networks that includes the notion of QoS in its routing
decisions.
The SAR protocol creates trees rooted at one-hop neighbors
of the sink by taking QoS metric, energy resource on each
path and priority level of each packet into consideration.
By using created trees, multiple paths from sink to sensors are
formed.
Simulation results show that SAR oers less power
consumption than the minimum-energy metric algorithm,
which focuses only the energy consumption of each packet
without considering its priority.
49
50
51
5.3. SPEED
The protocol requires each node to maintain information
about its neighbors and uses geographic forwarding to nd
the paths.
In addition, SPEED strive to ensure a certain speed for each
packet in the network. Moreover, SPEED can provide
congestion avoidance when the network is congested.
The routing module in SPEED is called stateless geographic
non-deterministic forwarding (SNFG) and works with four
other modules at the network layer.
52
54
The End~
55