1 / 98

Routing Protocols for Sensor Networks

Routing Protocols for Sensor Networks. Agenda. General Properties Architectures and Requirements Routing Protocols Classification 10 Suggested Routing Protocols: . LEACH PEGASIS TEEN APTEEN SPIN . DD MCF TTDD RW RR. Acknowledgements. E. Magistretti (U. Bologna Italy)

feng
Download Presentation

Routing Protocols for Sensor Networks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Routing ProtocolsforSensor Networks

  2. Agenda • General Properties • Architectures and Requirements • Routing Protocols Classification • 10 Suggested Routing Protocols: • LEACH • PEGASIS • TEEN • APTEEN • SPIN • DD • MCF • TTDD • RW • RR

  3. Acknowledgements • E. Magistretti (U. Bologna Italy) • J. Kulik (MIT; BBN Co.) • R. R. Choudhury, P. Kyasanur & N. Vaidya (UIUC) • P. Desai (UFL) • D. Braginsky and D. Estrin (UCLA) • S. Hazarika, W. Chen, Y. Gong & X. Liu (UMASS) • T. Kwon & Mjnam (SNU Korea) • R. Peterson & D. Rus (Dartmouth C.) • H.C. Chung, K. Ghoshal & J. Krishna (TAMU) • C. Tavoularis (Cornell ) • G. Dong (Virginia U.)

  4. WSN Dartmouth College

  5. Concepts

  6. Application:Military From UMASS

  7. Environmental From UMASS

  8. Circulatory Net Future Health

  9. Agenda • General Properties • Architectures and Requirements • Routing Protocols Classification • 10 Suggested Routing Protocols: • LEACH • PEGASIS • TEEN • APTEEN • SPIN • DD • MCF • TTDD • RW • RR

  10. General Properties (1) • Mainly for Information Collection • Single Owner • Up to Hundreds of Thousands of Nodes • Disposable Nodes • Cheap Nodes • Security Concerns

  11. General Properties (2) • Bounded Directed Stream (from/to Sink) • Somewhat Limited Computation Capability • Limited Communication Capability • Limited Power Resources • Node may not have Unique ID • Common case - Stationary Nodes

  12. Agenda • General Properties • Architectures and Requirements • Routing Protocols Classification • 10 Suggested Routing Protocols: • LEACH • PEGASIS • TEEN • APTEEN • SPIN • DD • MCF • TTDD • RW • RR

  13. General Architecture (1) Sensor Network Node Main Components • Sensor Unit • ADC – Analog Digital Converter • CPU – Central Processing Unit • Power Unit • Communication Unit

  14. General Architecture (2)

  15. General Requirements (1) • Varying Network Size • Inexpensive Nodes Equipment • Long Lifetime (Power) Þ Load-Balancing • Self-Organization • Re-tasking and Querying Capability

  16. General Requirements (2) • Sensible Data Aggregation • Consolidation of Redundant Data • Application Awareness Þ Tradeoff Communication for Computation • Possible Mobility

  17. Agenda • General Properties • Architectures and Requirements • Routing Protocols Classification • 10 Suggested Routing Protocols: • LEACH • PEGASIS • TEEN • APTEEN • SPIN • DD • MCF • TTDD • RW • RR

  18. Protocol Classification (1) • Proactive – First Compute all Routes; Then Route • Reactive – Compute Routes On-Demand • Hybrid – First Compute all Routes; Then Improve While Routing

  19. Protocol Classification (2) • Direct – Node and Sink Communicate Directly(Fast Drainage; Small Scale) • Flat (Equal) – Random Indirect Route(Fast Drainage Around Sink; Medium Scale) • Clustering (Hierarchical) – Route Thru Distinguished Nodes

  20. Protocol Classification (3) • Location Aware – Nodes knows where they are • Location-Less – Nodes location is unimportant • Mobility Aware – Nodes may move – Sources; Sinks; All

  21. Protocol Classification (4) • Unicast – One-to-One Message Passing • Multicast (actually Local Broadcast) – Node-to-Neighbors Message Passing • Broadcast – Full-Mesh – Source to Everyone

  22. Protocol Classification (5) Query Models: • Historical Queries: Analysis of historical data“What was the watermark 2h ago in the southeast?” • One-time Queries:Snapshot view“What is the watermark in the southeast?” • Persistent Queries:Monitoring over time“Report the watermark in the southeast for the next 4h”

  23. Protocol Classification (6)

  24. Agenda • General Properties • Architectures and Requirements • Routing Protocols Classification • 10 Suggested Routing Protocols: • LEACH • PEGASIS • TEEN • APTEEN • SPIN • DD • MCF • TTDD • RW • RR

  25. Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy 1 - LEACH – Discussed … • Self-Organizing – Adaptive Clustering • Cluster-Heads elect themselves – Now – “Random Round-Robin”Future – Power-Based Probability • Nodes die in random • Stationary Sink • Localized Coordination • Data Fusion Protocol Highlights

  26. Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy 1 - LEACH (2) • “Hot Spot” Problem(Nodes on a path from an event-congested area to the sink may drain) • Inadequate for Time-Critical Applications • Stationary Sink – Maybe Unpractical • Basic Algorithm assumes any node can communicate with sink – limited scale Main Drawbacks

  27. Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy 1 - LEACH (3) • Works in Rounds, each with Set-Up (Short) and Steady-State (Long) • Set-Up Phase - subdivided: • Advertisement (I am a Cluster-Head) • Cluster Set-Up (I am in your Cluster) • Schedule Creation (This is your slot) • Steady-State Phase: • Data Transmission using TDMA Main Procedures

  28. Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy 1 - LEACH (4) • Everyone uses the same channel • Different clusters use different CDMA codes • Code chosen in random • Cluster-Head communicate with Sink • Can be extended to Hierarchical Clustering Main Procedures

  29. Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy 1 - LEACH (5) Illustrations

  30. Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy 1 - LEACH (6) Illustrations

  31. Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems 2 - PEGASIS (1) • Token-Passing Chain-Based • Considered Near-Optimal (in a sense) • Nodes die in random • Stationary Nodes and Sink • Every node have a global network map • Data Fusion • Greedy chain construction Protocol Highlights

  32. Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems 2 - PEGASIS (2) • Stationary Nodes • Global Information Limited Scale: • Information travels many nodes • Assumes any node can communicate with sink Main Drawbacks

  33. Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems 2 - PEGASIS (3) • Greedy Algorithm Construct Chain –Start at a node far from sink and gather everyone neighbor by neighbor • Node i (mod N) is the leader in round i • Nodes passes token thru the chain to leader from both sides • Each node fuse its data with the rest • Leader transmit to sink Main Procedures

  34. Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems 2 - PEGASIS (4) Illustrations

  35. Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems 2 - PEGASIS (5) Rounds Until Death Illustrations

  36. Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network 3 - TEEN (1) • LEACH based Clustering • Smart data transmission (Saves Power) • Nodes dynamic reconfiguration ability • Suits for Time-Critical applications Protocol Highlights

  37. Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network 3 - TEEN (2) • “Hot Spot” Problem • Cluster-Heads need to listen constantly • Wasted time-slots • Can’t distinguish dead nodes • Other LEACH problems… Main Drawbacks

  38. Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network 3 - TEEN (3) • LEACH Proactive Clustering • Node transmit in timeslot only if both: • Value greater then a Hard Threshold (HT) • Value differs from last transmitted value (SV ) by more then a Soft Threshold (ST) • After transmission SV is reset Main Procedures

  39. Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network 3 - TEEN (4) Illustrations

  40. Adaptive Periodic Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network 4 - APTEEN (1) • Improved (Adaptive - Hybrid) TEEN • All TEEN Features • More flexible logic and timeslots • Multi-type Queries: • Historical (What was the temp. then?) • One-time (What’s the temp. now?) • Persistent (Tell me the temp for 2 hours) • Can distinguish dead nodes Protocol Highlights

  41. Adaptive Periodic Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network 4 - APTEEN (2) • LEACH problems… • Complex logic Main Drawbacks

  42. Adaptive Periodic Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network 4 - APTEEN (3) • LEACH Proactive Clustering • Node transmit in timeslot only if both: • Value greater then a Hard Threshold (HT) • Value differs from last transmitted value (SV ) by more then a Soft Threshold (ST) Or If did not transmit for a max time (TC ) Or if queried by some sink • After transmission SV is reset Main Procedures

  43. Adaptive Periodic Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network 4 - APTEEN (4) Power Consumption: • As could be expected – APTEEN is better the LEACHbut not as good as TEEN Illustrations

  44. Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation 5 - SPIN (1) • Network-wide Broadcast Limited by Negotiation and using Local Communication • Flooding problems solved: • Implosion – same data from many neighbors • Detection of overlapping regions • Excessive resources consumption (Blindness) • Needs only Localized Information • Data Fusion • Two main protocols SPIN-PP & SPIN-BC Protocol Highlights

  45. Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation 5 - SPIN (2) • Broadcast - Limited Scale – every node handles O(n) messages • Data is updated throughout network – unnecessary in many cases • Network lifetime - not clear • High degree nodes = High power needs Main Drawbacks

  46. Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation 5 - SPIN (3) SPIN-PP (Point-to-Point Communication) • Data is described by meta-data ADV msg. • Node has data Þsends ADV to neighbors • If neighbor do not have data Þ sends REQ • Node responds by sending the DATA • This process continues around the network • Nodes may aggregate their data to ADV • In a Lossy Network ADV may be repeated periodically and REQ if not answered Main Procedures

  47. Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation 5 - SPIN (4) SPIN-BC (Local Broadcast Communication) • ADV and DATA sending like PP (but in B.C.) • Since only one REQ answer is needed, any node waits a random interval and B.C. REQ only if none was received yet. • The rest – like SPIN-PP Main Procedures

  48. Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation 5 - SPIN (5) Node with data ADV Illustrations SPIN-PP Node with data advertises to all its neighbors

  49. Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation 5 - SPIN (5) Node with data REQ Illustrations SPIN-PP Neighbor requests for data and it is sent

  50. Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation 5 - SPIN (5) Node with data DATA Illustrations SPIN-PP Node with data advertises to all its neighbors

More Related