A Review on Efficient Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks

Transcription

1 A Review on Efficient Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks Sushil Vilas Kalore Department of Computer Science and Engineering G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering & Management Jalgaon, India Prashant Rewagad Department of Computer Science and Engineering G.H.Raisoni College of Engineering & Management Jalgaon, India Abstract In the 21 st century, smart environment wireless sensor networks have become an integral part of our lives. These wireless sensor networks contain large numbers of computing devices i.e. motes, but it has a very limited battery life-time and communication abilities (i.e. capacity, bandwidth etc.). So energy and routing are also major issues for wireless sensor networks. Most of the researchers use different techniques to increase the performance of wireless sensor networks in terms of network lifetime and using different routing protocols. We propose the multi-hop neighbor information technique by using shortcut tree routing protocol in wireless sensor networks. This review paper describes the multi-hop neighbor information technique and routing protocol methodologies which enhance the performance of WSN s. Keywords Shortcut tree routing protocol, WANET, MANET, WSN s, survey. I. INTRODUCTION In the 21 st century a Wireless sensor network is new technology used in computer science fields. Nowadays wireless sensor networks are increasingly being used to improve industrial business processes model, web services application, the defense sector, the Internet of things, space exploration. A wireless sensor network consists of some tiny sensing computing devices (i.e. motes) which are used to monitor various natural activities like temperature, sound vibration, pressure etc. [30]. Sensor motes or nodes collect data from natural activities and pass it to a central processing station or gateway called sink node[1].sensor motes have limited battery lifetime; if once these motes get discharged they cannot be charged again. So motes are the most vulnerable resource of the wireless sensor networks. From the wireless communication networking point of view, the most important factor is routing performance. So we propose the multi-hop neighbor information technique with STR protocol in a wireless sensor network[3]. The main role of this review paper is summarizes as follows: First, shortcut tree routing protocol is expected to be used in wireless sensor networks for industrial business processes model and home control application. We propose shortcut tree routing protocol mechanism to improve the entire network performance of WSN s. The STR mechanism is based on ZigBee tree routing method by using one hop neighbor table addressing scheme [4]. Second, we are using multi-hop neighbor information address assignment scheme with STR protocol to improve the routing efficiency. By using multi hop neighbor information technique the primary objectives that would be achieved include mainly reducing power consumption, improving channel throughput, improving packet delivery ratio and reducing end-to-end delays and routing overhead. All the above parameters will be calculated with the help of public domain network simulator ns-2 [21].They are defined as follows. (1) Throughput: is the number of successfully received packets in a unit time. (2) Delay: is the difference between the time at which the sender generated the packet and the time at which the receiver received the packet. (3) PDR (packet delivery ratio): is defined as the ratio of the number of delivered data packets to the destination. (4) Routing overhead: is the number of routing packets required for network communication. (5) Energy: represents the energy level of nodes in the network currently present. A node loses certain quantity of energy for every packet transmitted and received as a result the value of energy gets decreased. The present value of energy in a node after receiving or transmitting routing packet is the residual energy. This review paper is organized as follows: Section-II summarize surveys on routing protocols, and Section-III describes the classification of routing protocols. Section-IV introduces the shortcut tree routing algorithm and Multi-hop neighbor information technique. Finally, we have concluded this paper in Section V. II. SURVEYS ON ROUTING PROTOCOLS There are two classes of wireless ad hoc network i.e. A mobile ad hoc Networks and the sensor networks [31]. In wireless ad hoc network, there is neither fixed topology nor /15/$ IEEE 803

2 centralized management. So there are different criteria to design routing protocols for wireless ad hoc networks. A. Mobile Ad-HocNetworks MANET is one type of ad hoc network consisting of high capabilities mobile devices for data communication and that support various protocol schemes like unicast, multicast and hybrid routing. The classification of MANET unicast routing protocols are categorized into proactive routing and reactive routing protocols [5]. In proactive routing the routes of network topology can be calculated in advance and one or more tables are required to store routing information therefore called as pre-computed or table driven routing. The proactive routing protocols always update the routing information time to time for network topology. OLSR [6] and DSDV [7] are two examples of proactive routing protocol. As compared to the proactive routing, the routes of topology are computed on demand so also called as on-demand routing. In reactive routing all the routes are found within a network and once a route found, it transmits the data. But in case of route failure, it re-establishes and re-computes this procedure which is maintained by route maintenance procedure. The examples of reactive routing are AODV [8], DSR [9], and TORA [10].In the wireless ad-hoc network, reactive routing protocol supports more effective use of bandwidth utilization as compared to proactive routing. The advantage of reactive routing protocols requires less control overhead as compared to proactive routing. But the disadvantage of reactive routing protocols is that it requires long delay to search a routing path. In MANET s both these routing protocols provide optimal routing path for the given network topology. In unicast routing source nodes cannot communicate directly with one another. Therefore, to design an effective data communication (data packet delivery ratio) protocol in unicast routing today has become a critical issue. Currently, application point of view multicasting routing protocols are better than unicast routing protocols to create an effective data communication. Multicasting routing protocols become an active research area like military application, multimedia conferences etc. Multicasting routing [11] is the ability of a communication network to send a single message from root node to several receivers at different locations. Multicasting routing protocols are used in both popular networks wired and wireless environments. In the wired network there are two types of multicast trees [26] [29], (1) source-based trees and (2) shared trees. The source based tree is also called as the shortest-path tree and It finds optimal path from the source node i.e. root node of the tree to each of the children i.e. leaves. The distinct advantage of the shared based tree is used to find optimal path for dense area for multicast routing. The share tree constructs only one tree for each group and all groups share have a common root. The shared root in all these trees is acknowledged as the rendezvous point (RP) or core router. The share tree is also known as the core based tree and it reduces the number of trees in the network as compared to the source based tree. There are several basic algorithms used in multicast routing protocols for share based tree and source tree like RPF (Reverse Path Forwarding), RPB (Reverse Path Broadcasting), TRPB (Truncated RPB), RPM (Reverse Path Multicasting) and CBT (Core Based Trees) respectively[27] [28]. In a wireless environment MANET provides highly dynamic environment for the node s movement. Moreover, the bandwidth and battery power is limited. Due to these constraints multicasting routing protocols have emerged as the most active research areas. The examples of multicast routing protocols are MAODV [12] and AMRIS [13], ODMRP [14], ADMR [25]. The goal of all the above mentioned protocols is to provide efficient multi-hop routing capability. Apart from Unicasting and Multicasting routing techniques there is another popular Hybrid routing technique used in MANET for large networks and it combines the principles of both proactive and reactive routing protocol. In hybrid protocols, each node acts reactively in the area near to its neighbors and proactively outside its area. The examples of hybrid routing protocols are Zone Based Routing Protocol i.e. ZRP [22] and SHARP [23]. B. Wireless Sensor Networks The classification of routing protocols [15] for the wireless sensor network is depends upon the different application areas as well as sensor network architecture. In this survey paper some routing protocols are as data centric, hierarchical protocol and QoS based routing protocol. Wireless sensor networks contain large numbers of sensors and it does not have any global identity. So data distribution is one of the major challenges in wireless sensor networks. Data centric routing is used to transmit the data to every node and sink request for the data by sending the query to close node. Also data centric protocols help to eliminate redundant data transmissions for the network. The goal of data centric routing is to minimize the energy consumption between sink nodes to sensor nodes. The popular example of data centric routing protocol is Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation (SPIN) [16][17]. The number sensor nodes deployed in the sensing area may be in small or large network areas. According to the area or depending upon the application area some nodes may deploy in a homogeneous or heterogeneous way. So a routing scheme comes under the scalability property. Depending upon the wireless sensor network architecture routing protocols can be organized in a flat topology or on a hierarchical topology. In flat topology all the nodes play same roles in sensing, data processing, and routing functionality and it is helpful for small networks. But for large networks flat routing protocol is less efficient as compared to hierarchical routing. In hierarchical topology 804

3 (Clustering) larger networks are dynamically grouped into small networks to form clusters, with ordinary cluster members and the cluster heads (CHs) playing different roles. While ordinary cluster members are responsible for sensing, the CHs are responsible for additional tasks such as collecting and processing the sensing data from their cluster members and forwarding the results towards the base station (BS). The hierarchical protocols have several advantages like scalable energy efficient in finding routes and to control traffic. The examples of hierarchical routing protocols are Threshold sensitive Energy Efficient sensor Network protocol (TEEN) [19] and Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy (LEACH) [18] [33]. Leach protocol is one of the most sought after hierarchical clustering algorithms used in wireless sensor networks. Leach protocol performs two operations one is set-up phase and another is steady state phase. The set-up phase forms clusters and steady state phase transmits data.time line Leach protocol operation as shown in Fig 1. III. CLASSIFICATION OF ROUTING PROTOCOLS The classification of wireless ad hoc networks routing protocols is shown in Fig 2. All these routing protocols are described in Section II with reference number. In this paper we have classified only twelve routing protocols according to their characteristics for wireless ad hoc networks from the project survey point of view as show in Table1 with their explanations of acronyms. The table 1is based on the survey of Ref [1][31]. Fig. 1. Time line showing LEACH operation [33]. Hari Balakrishnan et al. [33], described that each sensor i selects itself to be a cluster head at the beginning of round r +1 with probability P i (t).the probability of each node to become a cluster head at round r is defined in the below equation (1) [33]. k N Pi( t ) N - k *(r mod ) k 0 : : Ci ( t ) Ci ( t ) 1 0 Where k = number of clusters during each round, N = number of nodes in the network, Ci(t) = it determines whether node i has been a Cluster head in most recent (r mod (N/k)) rounds [33]. Quality of Service was defined by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in 1994 [2]. Basically, QoSbased routing algorithms comprises of three types i.e. distributed routing (hop-by-hop routing) [32], source-based routing [32], and hierarchical routing algorithm [32]. QoS is the ability to provide different priority to different application, user to guarantee a certain level performance. Quality of Service routing protocol provides the facility like less energy consumption and good packet delivery ratio, delay, bandwidth etc. The best example of this routing protocol is SPEED (A Real-Time Routing Protocol) [20]. (1) Fig. 2. Classification of wireless ad hoc networks routing protocols. TABLE I. Sr. No. CLASSIFICATION AND EXPLANATION OF ROUTING PROTOCOL ACRONYMS Protocol/ Algorithm Acronym/ Name 1 OLSR[6] 2 DSDV[24][7] 3 AODV[8] Protocol/ Algorithm Name Optimized Link State Routing Protocol Destination-Sequenced Distance Vector Routing. Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Classification 4 DSR[9] Dynamic Source Routing 5 MAODV[12] 6 ADMR[25] Multicast Ad-hoc Ondemand Distance Vector. Adaptive Demand-Driven Multicast Routing. 7 ZRP[22] Zone Routing Protocol 8 SHARP[23] 9 SPIN[16][17] 10 LEACH[18] 11 TEEN[19] 12 SPEED[20] Sharp Hybrid Adaptive Routing Protocol Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation Low Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy. Threshold Sensitive Energy Efficient Sensor Network A Real-Time Routing Protocol Data centric Data centric 805

4 IV. MULTI-HOP NEIGHBOR INFORMATION TECHNIQUE Routing in WSNs has become a key research topic addressed in the literature. Therefore, in this section, research done on the shortcut tree routing protocol [3] is summarized. Before starting this, in section IV-A, the proposed work a multi-hop neighbor information technique has been described in section IV-B. A. Shortcut Tree Routing Protocol. In [3], the authors proposed that neighbor table based shortcut tree routing protocol for ZigBee wireless networks. The ZigBee tree routing has the basic drawback that a packet follows the tree like structure; it does not follow the optimal routing path. Their proposed work ensured that shortcut tree routing protocol provides the shortest routing path as well as preserves the benefits of the ZigBee tree routing. The proposed STR algorithm solves these two problems of the ZTR by using one hop neighbor information technique. Through simulations, the authors came to the conclusion that STR provides the similar routing performance with respect to AODV protocol. ZTR is specially used for low power devices like ZigBee/IEEE to support multi hop routing to find paths without maintaining any routing information and it assigns the addresses to devices through distributed addresses assignment scheme. In a ZigBee network, on the formation of network the ZigBee coordinator fixes the maximum number of children (Cm) of a ZigBee router, the maximum number of child routers (Rm) of a parent node, and the depth of the network (Lm). It further stipulates that Cm should be greater than or equal to Rm and a parent can have (Cm-Rm) end devices as its children. In this system, a parent device makes use of Cm, Rm, and Lm to calculate a parameter called Cskip, which further helps to calculate the initial addresses of its children s address pools [34]. The Cskip for the ZigBee router in depth d is defined in equation (2) [34]. 1+Cm. (Lm-d- 1) if Rm= 1 Cskip(d) 1+Cm-Rm-Cm.Rm Lm-d-1, otherwise 1-Rm (2) The equation mentioned below shows that for n th number of devices and k th router network address assigned by their parent at depth d A =A parent + Cskip( d ).(K-1 ) + 1 ( 1 k Rm), k A n =A parent + Cskip( d ).Rm + n ( 1 n Cm-Rm) (3) Consider two nodes i.e. x node at depth d and y which is a child of x. The value of Cskip (d) indicates that the maximum number of nodes in the sub tree rooted at y. So the size of the subtree rooted at y is defined by ZigBee network in equation (4) [34]. Cskip( d ) 1 Cm CmRm 2 Lm-d-2 CmRm...CmRm (4) In a ZigBee network, hierarchical address assignment [3] scheme computes the destination device address D with reference to the parent address A if condition (3) [34] is fulfilled. A < D < A + Cskip (d-1) (5) Since the depth of the sub tree is at most Lm-d-1. We can verify that Lm-d-2 ) Equation 4= 1+Cm ( 1+Rm+Rm Rm Lm-d-1 1+Cm ( 1-Rm ) = ( 1-Rm) = Cskip( d ) The Shortcut tree routing algorithm basically is on the same lines with ZigBee tree routing structure. The STR mechanism first finds the ancestors at each tree level with the help of TABLE 1 [3] and shortcut tree routing for cost calculation between source and destination is described in TABLE 2 [3]. B. Multi-Hop Neighbour Information Technique. In [3], the authors described that shortcut tree routing protocol with one hop neighbor information increases complete network performances. The authors presented STR has the short coming that the routing path is not always optimal in relation to the end-to-end hop distance; because the next hop node is selected based on the local information like one hop neighbor table. But sometimes the optimal path from source to destination it requires two hop neighbor information within one hop communication range. It is understood that maintaining two hop neighbor information results in high protocol overhead in the network with high node density [19], [20]. ZigBee network topologies support multi hop communication in the tree topology with low routing cost. We propose multi-hop neighbor information technique (multi-hop communication) by using shortcut tree routing protocol in a wireless sensor network in order to improve the routing efficiency. We would run multi hop neighbor technique on ns2 simulation environment and based on its results, we would use them in the applications of wireless sensor network in the diverse areas like industrial business processes model and home control application. 806

5 V. CONCLUSION For wireless ad hoc networks, dozens of routing protocols are proposed according to various application areas. We have discussed some routing protocols along with their advantages and disadvantages and have also cited some examples in Section II. In this survey paper, in addition to this we have also mentioned the classification of routing protocols according to their varied criteria only from the study point of view presented in section III. We studied shortcut tree routing protocol for ZigBee wireless networks. Further we are going to add shortcut tree routing protocols with multi hop communication for wireless sensor networks which will be the subject of our future work. Depending upon the results we would check parameters like throughput, end to end delay, energy, overhead, packet delivery ratio. We believe our survey would be very useful to the research for entire academic fraternity. REFERENCES [1] Ian F. Akyildiz, Weilian Su,Yogesh Sankarasubramaniam and Erdal Cayirci, A Survey on Sensor Networks, IEEE communication magazine, Augest [2] E. Crawley, R. Nair, B. Rajagopalan, H. Sandick, A Framework for QoSbased Routing in the Internet, Internet Request for Comments 2386, Aug [3] Taehong Kim, Seong Hoon Kim, Jinyoung Yang, Seong-eun Yoo Daeyoung Kim, Neighbor Table Based Shortcut Tree Routing in ZigBee Wireless Networks, IEEE Transaction Parallel and Distributed Systems, vol. 25, no 3, MARCH [4] T. Kim, D. Kim, N. Park, S. Yoo, and T.S. Lopez, Shortcut Tree Routing in ZigBeeNetworks, Proc. International Symposium. Wireless Pervasive Computing, [5] W. Kiess and M. Mauve, A Survey on Real-World Implementations of Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, Ad Hoc Networks,vol. 5, no. 3, pp , Apr [6] T. Clausen and P. Jacquet, Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR), Internet Request for Comments 3626, Oct [7] C.E. Perkins and P. Bhagwat, Highly Dynamic DestinationSequenced Distance-Vector Routing (DSDV) for Mobile Computers, SIGCOMM Computer Comm. Rev.,vol. 24, pp , [8] C.E. Perkins and E.M. Royer, Ad-Hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing, Proc. IEEE Workshop Mobile Computer Systems and Applications,Feb [9] D.B. Johnson and D.A. Maltz, Dynamic Source Routing in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks, Mobile Computing,vol. 353, pp , [10] V.D. Park and M.S. Corson, A Highly Adaptive Distributed Routing Algorithm for Mobile Wireless Networks, Proc. IEEE INFOCOM 97,1997. [11] X. Chen and J. Wu, Multicasting techniques in mobile ad-hoc net-works, The Handbook of Ad-hoc Wireless Networks, pp , [12] E. M. Royer and C. E. Perkins, Multicast operation of the ad-hoc ondemand distance vector routing protocol, in Proc. ACM MOBICOM,Aug. 1999, pp [13] C. W. Wu and Y. C. Tay, AMRIS: A multicast protocol for ad-hoc wireless networks, in Proc. IEEE MILCOM, 1999, vol. 1, pp [14] M. Gerla, S. J. Lee, and W. Su, On-demand multicast routing protocol (ODMRP) for ad-hoc networks, Internet draft, draft-ietf-manet-odmrp- 02.txt, January [15] J N.Al-Karaki, A E.Kamal, Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor Networks:A Survey, in the proceeding of in IEEE Wireless Communications, Dec [16] W. Heinzelman, J. Kulik, and H.Balakrishnan, Adaptive Protocols for Information Dissemination in Wireless Sensor Networks, Proc. 5th ACM/IEEE Mobicom, Seattle, WA, pp , Augest [17] J. Kulik, W. R. Heinzelman, and H. Balakrishnan, Negotiation-Based Protocols for Disseminating Information in Wireless Sensor Networks, Wireless Networks,Mobicom'99,volume. 8, pp , [18] W. Heinzelman, A. Chandrakasan, and H. Balakrishnan, Energy-efficient communication protocol for wireless sensor networks, in the Proceeding of the Hawaii International Conference System Sciences, Hawaii, January [19] A. Manjeshwar and D. P. Agrawal, APTEEN: AHybrid Protocol for Efficient Routing and Comprehensive Information Retrieval in Wireless Sensor Networks, in the Proceedings of International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS), [20] Tian He, Stankovic, J.A, Chenyang Lu, Abdelzaher, T, SPEED: A stateless protocol for real-time communication in sensor networks, in the Proceedings of International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, May [21] The Network Simulator, [22] Pearlman, Marc R., Haas, Zygmunt J, Determining the Optimal Configuration for the Zone Routing Protocol, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, August 1999, Vol. 17, No. 8. [23] V. Ramasubramanian, Z. J. Haas, E. Gun Sirer, SHARP: A Hybrid Adaptive Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, ACM New York, [24] A. H. Abd rahman & Z. Ahmad Zukarnain, Performance Comparison of AODV,DSDV & I-DSDV Routing Protocols in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, European Journal of Scientific Research Vol.31 No.4, [25] J. G. Jetcheva and D. B. Johnson, Adaptive demand-driven multicast routing in multi-hop wireless ad hoc networks, In Proceedings of the 2001 ACM International Symposium on Mobile ad hoc networking and computing, pp , [26] Karl Solie, Leah Lynch, CCIE Practical Studies Volume II (CCIE Self- Study),Cisco Press, Nov [27] Tony Ballardie, Paul Francist, Jon Crowcroft, Core Based Trees (CBT) An Architecture for Scalable Inter-Domain Multicast Routing, SIGCOMM 93 - Ithaca, N.Y., USA /9/93, ACM /93 /0009 /0085. [28] C. Shields and J.J. Garcia- Luna-Aceves, The Ordered Core Based Tree Protocol, In Proceedings of IEEE Infocom'97, Kobe, Japan, April [29] Behrouz-A.-Forouzan, TCP/IP Protocol Suite, Tata McGraw-Hill Education, [30] Karl Holger, Willig Andreas,Protocol and Architecture for Wireless Sensor Network, John Willey and Sons Ltd, [31] Rajashree.V.Biradar,V.C.Patil, Dr.S.R.Sawant, and Dr.R.R.Mudholkar, Classfication and comparison of routing protocols in wireless sensor networks, Special Issue on Ubiquitous Computing Security Systems Journal, volume 4,Aug, [32] Shigang Chen, Routing Support for Providing Guaranteed End-To-End Quality-Of-Service, ACM Digital library, USA, [33] Wendi B. Heinzelman, Anantha P. Chandrakasan,Hari Balakrishnan, An Application-Specific Protocol Architecture for Wireless Microsensor Networks, IEEE trasactions on wireless communication, vol 1, no. 4, oct [34] Yu-Chee Tseng and Meng-Shiuan Pan, ZigBee and Their Applications, in Sensor Networks and Configuration, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007, pp