Limits...
Region-Based Collision Avoidance Beaconless Geographic Routing Protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks.

Lee J, Park H, Kang S, Kim KI - Sensors (Basel) (2015)

Bottom Line: Furthermore, these protocols are designed for a uniform sensor field, so they cannot be directly applied to practical irregular sensor fields with partial voids.To prevent the failure of finding a forwarding node and to remove unnecessary duplication, in this paper, we propose a region-based collision avoidance beaconless geographic routing protocol to increase forwarding opportunities for randomly-deployed sensor networks.Moreover, simulation results are given to demonstrate the increased packet delivery ratio and shorten end-to-end delay, rather than well-referred comparative protocols.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. jclee0333@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT
Due to the lack of dependency on beacon messages for location exchange, the beaconless geographic routing protocol has attracted considerable attention from the research community. However, existing beaconless geographic routing protocols are likely to generate duplicated data packets when multiple winners in the greedy area are selected. Furthermore, these protocols are designed for a uniform sensor field, so they cannot be directly applied to practical irregular sensor fields with partial voids. To prevent the failure of finding a forwarding node and to remove unnecessary duplication, in this paper, we propose a region-based collision avoidance beaconless geographic routing protocol to increase forwarding opportunities for randomly-deployed sensor networks. By employing different contention priorities into the mutually-communicable nodes and the rest of the nodes in the greedy area, every neighbor node in the greedy area can be used for data forwarding without any packet duplication. Moreover, simulation results are given to demonstrate the increased packet delivery ratio and shorten end-to-end delay, rather than well-referred comparative protocols.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

An example of next-hop forwarder selection failure in the restricted forwarding area-based beaconless routing protocol.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4507634&req=5

f1-sensors-15-13222: An example of next-hop forwarder selection failure in the restricted forwarding area-based beaconless routing protocol.

Mentions: For example, as shown in Figure 1, the sender S broadcasts its data packet to its neighbors, including both the location information of the forwarding candidate area (dashed small circle area) from the sender and position of the destination D. Note that node in the forwarding candidate area tries to wait differently according to its own timer, related to the distance between the destination and itself, while nodes in the rest of the area drop the received packet from S. However, in this case, there are no nodes that successfully receive the sender's broadcast data in the restricted forwarding candidate area due to both the network holes and transmission failure. Although there exist appropriate candidates in the rest of the area (Nodes B and C), the sender S has to send the data packet again or change its routing mode from the greedy mode to the recovery mode. Unfortunately, the neighbors cannot be guaranteed to successfully receive the data packet again at the next time due to the error-prone nature of wireless links. Furthermore, if the routing mode is changed, the protocol requires a number of control messages and wastes much node energy, because it has to get the positions of all neighbors to detour the holes. These unnecessary and redundant control messages may reduce the entire network performance.


Region-Based Collision Avoidance Beaconless Geographic Routing Protocol in Wireless Sensor Networks.

Lee J, Park H, Kang S, Kim KI - Sensors (Basel) (2015)

An example of next-hop forwarder selection failure in the restricted forwarding area-based beaconless routing protocol.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4507634&req=5

f1-sensors-15-13222: An example of next-hop forwarder selection failure in the restricted forwarding area-based beaconless routing protocol.
Mentions: For example, as shown in Figure 1, the sender S broadcasts its data packet to its neighbors, including both the location information of the forwarding candidate area (dashed small circle area) from the sender and position of the destination D. Note that node in the forwarding candidate area tries to wait differently according to its own timer, related to the distance between the destination and itself, while nodes in the rest of the area drop the received packet from S. However, in this case, there are no nodes that successfully receive the sender's broadcast data in the restricted forwarding candidate area due to both the network holes and transmission failure. Although there exist appropriate candidates in the rest of the area (Nodes B and C), the sender S has to send the data packet again or change its routing mode from the greedy mode to the recovery mode. Unfortunately, the neighbors cannot be guaranteed to successfully receive the data packet again at the next time due to the error-prone nature of wireless links. Furthermore, if the routing mode is changed, the protocol requires a number of control messages and wastes much node energy, because it has to get the positions of all neighbors to detour the holes. These unnecessary and redundant control messages may reduce the entire network performance.

Bottom Line: Furthermore, these protocols are designed for a uniform sensor field, so they cannot be directly applied to practical irregular sensor fields with partial voids.To prevent the failure of finding a forwarding node and to remove unnecessary duplication, in this paper, we propose a region-based collision avoidance beaconless geographic routing protocol to increase forwarding opportunities for randomly-deployed sensor networks.Moreover, simulation results are given to demonstrate the increased packet delivery ratio and shorten end-to-end delay, rather than well-referred comparative protocols.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Computer Science, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA. jclee0333@gmail.com.

ABSTRACT
Due to the lack of dependency on beacon messages for location exchange, the beaconless geographic routing protocol has attracted considerable attention from the research community. However, existing beaconless geographic routing protocols are likely to generate duplicated data packets when multiple winners in the greedy area are selected. Furthermore, these protocols are designed for a uniform sensor field, so they cannot be directly applied to practical irregular sensor fields with partial voids. To prevent the failure of finding a forwarding node and to remove unnecessary duplication, in this paper, we propose a region-based collision avoidance beaconless geographic routing protocol to increase forwarding opportunities for randomly-deployed sensor networks. By employing different contention priorities into the mutually-communicable nodes and the rest of the nodes in the greedy area, every neighbor node in the greedy area can be used for data forwarding without any packet duplication. Moreover, simulation results are given to demonstrate the increased packet delivery ratio and shorten end-to-end delay, rather than well-referred comparative protocols.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus