Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1007/978-3-642-00224-3_8guideproceedingsArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesewsnConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

Potentials of Opportunistic Routing in Energy-Constrained Wireless Sensor Networks

Authors Info & Claims
Published:11 February 2009Publication History

ABSTRACT

The low quality of wireless links leads to perpetual packet losses. While an acknowledgment mechanism is generally used to cope with these losses, multiple retransmissions nevertheless occur. Opportunistic routing limits these retransmissions by taking advantage of the broadcast nature of the wireless channel: sending packets to multiple receivers at once, and only then, based on the outcome, choosing the actual next hop [1]. In this paper, we first study the potentials of opportunistic routing in energy-constrained wireless sensor networks. In particular, the reduction of retransmissions due to the broadcast advantage is balanced with the arising need for coordination to avoid duplicate packets. We then propose Coordinated Anypath Routing, an opportunistic routing protocol designed for wireless sensor networks, in which the coordination between receivers is handled by an overhearing-based acknowledgment scheme. Our protocol may be used to minimize either retransmissions or power consumption, and our simulation results show that, with lossy links, energy savings go up to 7%, even for small networks of 20 nodes.

References

  1. Biswas, S., Morris, R.: ExOR: Opportunistic multi-hop routing for wireless networks. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference (October 2005). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Barrenetxea, G., Ingelrest, F., Schaefer, G., Vetterli, M., Couach, O., Parlange, M.: Sensorscope: Out-of-the-box environmental monitoring. In: Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Conference on Information Processing in Sensor Networks (IPSN) (April 2008). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Barrenetxea, G., Ingelrest, F., Schaefer, G., Vetterli, M.: The hitchhiker's guide to successful wireless sensor network deployments. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys) (November 2008). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Jacquet, P., Mühlethaler, P., Clausen, T., Laouiti, A., Qayyum, A., Viennot, L.: Optimized link state routing protocol for ad hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Multi-topic Conference (INMIC) (December 2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Haas, Z.J.: A new routing protocol for the reconfigurable wireless networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Universal Personal Communications (October 1997).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Woo, A., Tong, T., Culler, D.: Taming the underlying challenges of reliable multi-hop routing in sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys) (November 2003). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Dubois-Ferrière, H., Grossglauser, M., Vetterli, M.: Least-cost opportunistic routing. In: Proceedings of the Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (September 2007).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Basagni, S., Giordano, S., Stojmenovic, I.: Mobile Ad Hoc Networking. IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos (2004). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Estrin, D., Girod, L., Pottie, G., Srivastava, M.: Instrumenting the world with wireless sensor networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP) (May 2001).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Johnson, D.B.: Routing in ad hoc networks of mobile hosts. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications (WMCSA) (December 1994). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Fonseca, R., Gnawali, O., Jamieson, K., Kim, S., Levis, P., Woo, A.: The collection tree protocol (CTP) (2006), http://www.tinyos.net/tinyos-2.x/doc/html/tep123.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Chang, J.H., Tassiulas, L.: Maximum lifetime routing in wireless sensor networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 12(4), 609-619 (2004). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Al-Karaki, J.N., Kamal, A.E.: Routing techniques in wireless sensor networks: A survey. IEEE Wireless Communications 11(6), 6-28 (2004). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Couto, D.D., Aguayo, D., Bicket, J., Morris, R.: A high-throughput path metric for multi-hop wireless routing. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom) (September 2003). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Laneman, J., Tse, D., Wornell, G.: Cooperative diversity in wireless networks: Efficient protocols and outage behavior. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 50(12), 3062-3080 (2004). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Choudhury, R., Vaidya, N.: Mac-layer anycasting in ad hoc networks. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference (August 2004). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Selavo, L., Wood, A., Cao, Q., Sookoor, T., Liu, H., Srinivasan, A., Wu, Y., Kang, W., Stankovic, J., Young, D., Porter, J.: LUSTER: Wireless sensor network for environmental research. In: Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys) (November 2007). Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  1. Potentials of Opportunistic Routing in Energy-Constrained Wireless Sensor Networks

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image Guide Proceedings
      EWSN '09: Proceedings of the 6th European Conference on Wireless Sensor Networks
      February 2009
      374 pages
      ISBN:9783642002236
      • Editors:
      • Utz Roedig,
      • Cormac J. Sreenan

      Publisher

      Springer-Verlag

      Berlin, Heidelberg

      Publication History

      • Published: 11 February 2009

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate81of195submissions,42%