0% found this document useful (0 votes)

98 views

Routing Protocols: Sensor Networks

This document discusses routing protocols for sensor networks. It begins with an agenda and acknowledgements section. Then it covers general properties of sensor networks, such as nodes being disposable and having limited power. It describes common sensor network architectures and requirements. The document also classifies different types of routing protocols and discusses 10 specific protocols, including LEACH, PEGASIS, TEEN, and APTEEN. It provides overviews and illustrations of how these protocols operate.

Uploaded by

Liza Miraballes

Available Formats

Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

98 views

Routing Protocols: Sensor Networks

Uploaded by

Liza Miraballes

Available Formats

Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

You are on page 1/ 98

Routing Protocols

for
Sensor Networks
Agenda
General Properties
Architectures and Requirements
Routing Protocols Classification
10 Suggested Routing Protocols:
LEACH DD
PEGASIS MCF
TEEN TTDD
APTEEN RW
SPIN RR
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.)
WSN

Dartmouth College
Concepts
Application: Military

From UMASS
Environmental

From UMASS
Future Health

Circulatory Net
Agenda
General Properties
Architectures and Requirements
Routing Protocols Classification
10 Suggested Routing Protocols:
LEACH DD
PEGASIS MCF
TEEN TTDD
APTEEN RW
SPIN RR
General Properties (1)
 Mainly for Information Collection
 Single Owner
 Up to Hundreds of Thousands of Nodes
 Disposable Nodes
 Cheap Nodes
 Security Concerns
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
Agenda
General Properties
Architectures and Requirements
Routing Protocols Classification
10 Suggested Routing Protocols:
LEACH DD
PEGASIS MCF
TEEN TTDD
APTEEN RW
SPIN RR
General Architecture (1)
Sensor Network Node Main Components

 Sensor Unit
 ADC – Analog Digital Converter
 CPU – Central Processing Unit
 Power Unit
 Communication Unit
General Architecture (2)
General Requirements (1)
 Varying Network Size
 Inexpensive Nodes Equipment
 Long Lifetime (Power) 
Load-Balancing
 Self-Organization
 Re-tasking and Querying Capability
General Requirements (2)
 Sensible Data Aggregation
 Consolidation of Redundant Data
 Application Awareness

 Tradeoff
Communication for Computation
 Possible Mobility
Agenda
General Properties
Architectures and Requirements
Routing Protocols Classification
10 Suggested Routing Protocols:
LEACH DD
PEGASIS MCF
TEEN TTDD
APTEEN RW
SPIN RR
Protocol Classification (1)
 Proactive –
First Compute all Routes;
Then Route
 Reactive –
Compute Routes On-Demand
 Hybrid –
First Compute all Routes;
Then Improve While Routing
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
Protocol Classification (3)
 Location Aware –
Nodes knows where they are
 Location-Less –
Nodes location is unimportant
 Mobility Aware –
Nodes may move –
Sources; Sinks; All
Protocol Classification (4)
 Unicast –
One-to-One Message Passing
 Multicast (actually Local Broadcast) –
Node-to-Neighbors Message Passing
 Broadcast –
Full-Mesh – Source to Everyone
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”
Protocol Classification (6)
Agenda
General Properties
Architectures and Requirements
Routing Protocols Classification
10 Suggested Routing Protocols:
LEACH DD
PEGASIS MCF
TEEN TTDD
APTEEN RW
SPIN RR
Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
1 - LEACH – Discussed …
 Self-Organizing – Adaptive Clustering
Protocol Highlights

 Cluster-Heads elect themselves –

Now – “Random Round-Robin”
Future – Power-Based Probability
 Nodes die in random
 Stationary Sink
 Localized Coordination
 Data Fusion
Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
1 - LEACH (2)
 “Hot Spot” Problem
Main Drawbacks

(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
Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
1 - LEACH (3)
 Works in Rounds, each with
Main Procedures

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
Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
1 - LEACH (4)
Everyone uses the same channel
Main Procedures


 Different clusters use different CDMA codes
 Code chosen in random

 Cluster-Head communicate with Sink

 Can be extended to Hierarchical Clustering
Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
1 - LEACH (5)
Illustrations
Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy
1 - LEACH (6)
Illustrations
Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems

2 - PEGASIS (1)
 Token-Passing Chain-Based
Protocol Highlights

 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
Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems

2 - PEGASIS (2)
 Stationary Nodes
Main Drawbacks

 Global Information
Limited Scale:
 Information travels many nodes
 Assumes any node can communicate
with sink
Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems

2 - PEGASIS (3)
 Greedy Algorithm Construct Chain –
Main Procedures

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
Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems

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

2 - PEGASIS (5)
Illustrations

Rounds Until Death

Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network

3 - TEEN (1)
 LEACH based Clustering
Protocol Highlights

 Smart data transmission (Saves Power)

 Nodes dynamic reconfiguration ability
 Suits for Time-Critical applications
Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network

3 - TEEN (2)
 “Hot Spot” Problem
Main Drawbacks

 Cluster-Heads need to listen constantly

 Wasted time-slots
 Can’t distinguish dead nodes
 Other LEACH problems…
Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network

3 - TEEN (3)
 LEACH Proactive Clustering
Main Procedures

 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
Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network

3 - TEEN (4)
Illustrations
Adaptive Periodic Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network

4 - APTEEN (1)
 Improved (Adaptive - Hybrid) TEEN
Protocol Highlights

 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
Adaptive Periodic Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network

4 - APTEEN (2)
 LEACH problems…
Main Drawbacks

 Complex logic
Adaptive Periodic Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network

4 - APTEEN (3)
 LEACH Proactive Clustering
Main Procedures

 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
Adaptive Periodic Threshold-sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network

4 - APTEEN (4)
Illustrations

Power Consumption:
 As could be expected –
APTEEN is better the LEACH
but not as good as TEEN
Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation

5 - SPIN (1)
 Network-wide Broadcast Limited by
Protocol Highlights

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
 DataFusion
 Two main protocols SPIN-PP & SPIN-BC
Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation

5 - SPIN (2)
 Broadcast - Limited Scale –
Main Drawbacks

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
Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation

5 - SPIN (3)
SPIN-PP (Point-to-Point Communication)
Main Procedures

 Data is described by meta-data ADV msg.

 Node has data  sends ADV to neighbors
 If neighbor do not have data  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
Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation

5 - SPIN (4)
SPIN-BC (Local Broadcast Communication)
Main Procedures

 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
Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation