120 likes | 147 Views
Understand how a self-optimizing multicast tree-based system handles frequent sensor failures and energy constraints in large-scale sensor networks. Delve into design challenges, reliability concerns, and the innovative Multicast Tree Protocol for efficient data forwarding.
E N D
Auto-configurationIn Wireless Sensor Networks 2004. 4. 1. Nakjung Choi, Haeyong Kim, Minji Nam April Fools’ Day
Our team • Members • Nakjung Choi, Minji Nam, Haeyong Kim • Rough Ideas • Node identification? • Use information of node position? (low mobility) • Routing protocol uses the information? • Ex) auto-assign prefix • Auto-config + topology management? • Coverage area in wireless sensor networks • Node’s sensing coverage, transmission coverage • Other factors • Calculate appropriate node density? • If possible, construct topology → grid size, address field size)
A Self-Organizing Approach to Data Forwardingin Large-Scale Sensor Networks
Introduction • Frequent sensor failures, stringent energy constraints • Unique design challenges for data forwarding • Sensor Networks • Stimuli and sinks • Very susceptible to sensor failures • Energy depletion or destruction • In this paper • Self-optimizing multicast tree-based forwarding infra. • Node failure recovery algorithm
Design Issues • Design issues for data forwarding protocol • Scalability • No global knowledge, no global synchronization • Reliable delivery • In spite of unreliable individual sensors • Limited resources • Limited energy supply, mem. Size, processing pw. • Error-prone wireless medium • Lower bandwidth • No globally unique ID • Cannot rely on the existence of a unique receiver
The Multicast Tree Protocol • The minimum spanning tree • Infeasible, so through local mechanism • Basic operation • Through sinks’ advertisement process, construct multicast tree • In the absence of sink interests, sensors are inactive • In the absence of stimuli, low-frequency hello message
The Multicast Tree Protocol • First phase • Broadcasting sink advertisements • SinkAdvertisement message • SinkID and nofhops • By setting a TTL value • Second phase • Election of candidate merge points • SinkID and nofhops in Sink Table • If nofhops is less than TTL value, forward • Third phase • Election of one merge point • MergeAdvertisement • The sum of distances from itself to all sinks • A set of their SinkID
The Multicast Tree Protocol • Fourth phase • Branch formation towards the sinks • MergeAcknowledgment towards all sinks in its sink table • Builds branches of the tree • All neighbors of a sensor have different IDs • Maintaining the tree • KeepAlive message at very low frequency • Forming a new branch • Joining of the new node • Elect the sensor on the tree that is closest to new node • MergeAcknowledgment towards the new node
The Multicast Tree Protocol • Report forwarding • Receive from its upstream neighbors and forwards it to its neighbors on the tree • Only upstream and downstream IDs in routing tables • Tree damage and reconnection • Detection of sudden node failure • Using timer and passive acknowledgment • For smooth handoff from a low-energy sensor • Informs its upstream and downstream neighbors of its failure
Performance Evaluation UsingParsec RPF (Reverse Path Forwarding) TRPF (Truncated RPF) MPIM (Merge Point initiated Multicast) SIM (Sink Initiated Multicast) RPF – large overhead TRPF – comparable to the multicast-based approach, but large storage requirement MPIM is slightly better than SIM
References [1] Mirkovic, J.; Venkataramani, G.P.; Lu, S., Zhang, L., “A self-organizing approach to data forwarding in large-scale sensor networks,“ ICC 2001. IEEE International Conference, June 2001 [2] Alberto Cerpa and Deborah Estrin, “ASCENT: Adaptive Self-Configuring Sensor Networks Topologies,” in Proceedings of the Twenty First International Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM 2002), June 23-27 2002 [3] “A Two-Tier Data Dissemination Model for Large-scale Wireless Sensor Networks”