Networking Sensors, I

Similar documents
SENSOR-MAC CASE STUDY

Geographical routing 1

MAC LAYER. Murat Demirbas SUNY Buffalo

Simulations of the quadrilateral-based localization

CS 410/510 Sensor Networks Portland State University

Presented by: Murad Kaplan

Embedded Internet and the Internet of Things WS 12/13

Medium Access Control. MAC protocols: design goals, challenges, contention-based and contention-free protocols

QoS Challenges and QoS-Aware MAC Protocols in Wireless Sensor Networks

WIRELESS sensor networking is an emerging technology

UNIT IV. Data link layer protocols. Prof.Prasad S.Halgaonkar

IEEE Medium Access Control. Medium Access Control

Mohamed Khedr.

BGR: Blind Geographic Routing for Sensor Networks

Medium Access Control in Wireless Networks

CSE 461: Wireless Networks

Sensor Network Protocols

ZigBee/ David Sanchez Sanchez.

Computational Model for Energy Aware TDMA-based MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Network System

Geographic Routing in Simulation: GPSR

MAC in /20/06

Performance and Comparison of Energy Efficient MAC Protocol in Wireless Sensor Network

Wireless Sensor Networks

Routing in Sensor Networks

15-441: Computer Networking. Lecture 24: Ad-Hoc Wireless Networks

Analysis of S-MAC/T-MAC Protocols for Wireless Sensor Networks

Wireless Sensor Networks 8th Lecture

COMPARISON OF TIME-BASED AND SMAC PROTOCOLS IN FLAT GRID WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS VER VARYING TRAFFIC DENSITY Jobin Varghese 1 and K.

CSMA based Medium Access Control for Wireless Sensor Network

WPAN/WBANs: ZigBee. Dmitri A. Moltchanov kurssit/elt-53306/

AN ADAPTIVE ENERGY EFFICIENT MAC PROTOCOL FOR WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

Principles of Wireless Sensor Networks. Medium Access Control and IEEE

Rahman 1. Application

Outline. Introduction to Networked Embedded Systems - Embedded systems Networked embedded systems Embedded Internet - Network properties

Logical Link Control (LLC) Medium Access Control (MAC)

CHAPTER 2 WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS AND NEED OF TOPOLOGY CONTROL

Advanced Networking Technologies

Ad hoc and Sensor Networks Chapter 5: Medium access control protocols

Multi-Channel MAC for Ad Hoc Networks: Handling Multi-Channel Hidden Terminals Using A Single Transceiver

Lecture 16: QoS and "

CSCD 433 Network Programming Fall Lecture 7 Ethernet and Wireless

Unicast Routing in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks. Dr. Ashikur Rahman CSE 6811: Wireless Ad hoc Networks

QoS-Enabled Video Streaming in Wireless Sensor Networks

An Energy Consumption Analytic Model for A Wireless Sensor MAC Protocol

Reservation Packet Medium Access Control for Wireless Sensor Networks

CSC8223 Wireless Sensor Networks. Chapter 5 Medium Access Control Protocols

Wireless communication standards: What makes them unattractive for WSN:

Challenges in Geographic Routing: Sparse Networks, Obstacles, and Traffic Provisioning

Lecture 17: Wireless Networking"

Chapter 6 Wireless and Mobile Networks

Modulation. Propagation. Typical frequency bands

AT THE END OF THIS SECTION, YOU SHOULD HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE

Principles of Wireless Sensor Networks

Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs)) and Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) Computer Networks: Wireless Networks 1

Outline. MAC (Medium Access Control) General MAC Requirements. Typical MAC protocols. Typical MAC protocols

15-441: Computer Networking. Wireless Networking

ZIGBEE. Erkan Ünal CSE 401 SPECIAL TOPICS IN COMPUTER NETWORKS

Information Brokerage

Chapter 3: Medium Access Control in Wireless Sensor Networks

On-demand power management for ad hoc networks q

Implementation of an Adaptive MAC Protocol in WSN using Network Simulator-2

Geo-Routing. Chapter 2. Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks Roger Wattenhofer

CSE 6811 Ashikur Rahman

Wireless Networking & Mobile Computing

AMAC: Traffic-Adaptive Sensor Network MAC Protocol through Variable Duty-Cycle Operations

RT-Link: A global time-synchronized link protocol for sensor networks Anthony Rowe, Rahul Mangharam, Raj Rajkumar

MAC Essentials for Wireless Sensor Networks

WP-PD Wirepas Mesh Overview

TOSSIM simulation of wireless sensor network serving as hardware platform for Hopfield neural net configured for max independent set

Geographical Routing Algorithms In Asynchronous Wireless Sensor Network

Politecnico di Milano Advanced Network Technologies Laboratory. ZigBee Revealed

An Energy-Efficient MAC Protocol for Delay-Sensitive Wireless Sensor Networks

A Performance Comparison of Multi-Hop Wireless Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols. Broch et al Presented by Brian Card

04/11/2011. Wireless LANs. CSE 3213 Fall November Overview

standards like IEEE [37], IEEE [38] or IEEE [39] do not consider

Lecture 6: Vehicular Computing and Networking. Cristian Borcea Department of Computer Science NJIT

Data Communications. Data Link Layer Protocols Wireless LANs

Computer Networks 53 (2009) Contents lists available at ScienceDirect. Computer Networks. journal homepage:

Wireless Communications

Lecture 24: CSE 123: Computer Networks Stefan Savage. HW4 due NOW

Wireless and Mobile Networks 7-2

Multiple Access Links and Protocols

Computer Communication III

CONCLUSIONS AND SCOPE FOR FUTURE WORK

GLIDER: Gradient Landmark-Based Distributed Routing for Sensor Networks. Stanford University. HP Labs

Routing protocols in WSN

Appointed BrOadcast (ABO): Reducing Routing Overhead in. IEEE Mobile Ad Hoc Networks

Principles of Wireless Sensor Networks. Routing, Zigbee, and RPL

Random Asynchronous Wakeup Protocol for Sensor Networks

A MAC Protocol with Little Idle Listening for Wireless Sensor Networks

Data Communication. Guaranteed Delivery Based on Memorization

CSC 4900 Computer Networks: Wireless Networks

Delay Analysis of ML-MAC Algorithm For Wireless Sensor Networks

6.9 Summary. 11/20/2013 Wireless and Mobile Networks (SSL) 6-1. Characteristics of selected wireless link standards a, g point-to-point

CS 43: Computer Networks Media Access. Kevin Webb Swarthmore College November 30, 2017

Wireless and WiFi. Daniel Zappala. CS 460 Computer Networking Brigham Young University

ICE 1332/0715 Mobile Computing (Summer, 2008)

Wireless LANs. ITS 413 Internet Technologies and Applications

R-MAC: An Energy-Efficient MAC Protocol for Underwater Sensor Networks

Lecture 25: CSE 123: Computer Networks Alex C. Snoeren. HW4 due NOW

Transcription:

Networking Sensors, I Sensing Networking Leonidas Guibas Stanford University Computation CS428

Networking Sensors Networking is a crucial capability for sensor networks -- networking allows: Placement of sensors close to signal sources Collaborative information processing Synchronization and localization But it is also one of the most demanding: radio communication consumes the most energy nodes and especially links can be unreliable and unstable; this must be mitigated by the network protocol stack

Common Assumptions Made Radio range is a disk of radius r around each node. Node connectivity graph can be modeled as the unit distance graph (UDG) by setting r = 1 Network deployment is ad hoc, so node layout does not follow any particular topology Nodes operate untethered and have limited power resources. Communication must be used sparingly Typical sensor nodes have no mobility Nodes know their geographic location

The Lower Layers of the Network Protocol Stack

Medium Access Control The MAC layer of the protocol stack is concerned with the reliable transfer of information across individual physical links In the WSN case, the links utilize a shared medium where contention may occur WSNs have several unique characteristics that differentiate them from other networks fairness issues at the node level are less important events of interest typically occur in a sporadic and episodic manner; thus high variance has be dealt with in node usage, latency times, etc. The relatively fixed node topology can be exploited in synchronizing node sleep schedules, so as to reduce collision and overhearing overhead, and therefore and energy use.

SMAC [Ye, Heidemann, Estrin] To reduce latency and control overhead, SMAC tries to coordinate sleep schedules among neighboring nodes by periodic schedule exchanges. In general SMAC reduces Collision overhead by using RTS and CTS Overhearing by switching the radio off when the transmission is not meant for that node Control overhead by message passing Idle listening by periodic listen and sleep Significantly more efficient than 802.11, especially in settings with long latency and message inter-arrival times

Periodic Listen and Sleep If no sensing event happens, nodes are idle for a long time, so it is not necessary to keep the nodes listening all the time Each node go into periodic sleep mode during which it switches the radio off and sets a timer to awaken itself later When the timer expires, the node wakes up and listens to see if any other node wants to talk to it

Duration of sleep and listen time can be selected based on the application scenario To reduce control overhead, neighboring nodes synchronize (i.e., nodes listen and sleep together) via the exchange of sleep schedules

Not all neighboring nodes can synchronize together Two neighboring nodes (A and B) can have different schedules, if they are required to synchronize with different nodes Note: sleep/listening times are long compared to typical clock drift between nodes fine grain synchronization is not required (as in TDMA)

If a node A wants to talk to node B, it just waits until B is listening If multiple neighbors want to talk to a node, they need to contend for the medium Contention mechanism is the same as that in IEEE 802.11 (using RTS and CTS) Nodes, after starting data transmission, do not go to periodic sleep until they finish transmission

Choosing and Maintaining Schedules Each node maintains a schedule table that stores the schedules of all its known neighbors. To establish the initial schedule (at startup), the following steps are followed: A node first listens for a certain amount of time. If it does not hear a schedule from another node, it randomly chooses a schedule for itself and broadcast its schedule immediately. This node is called a SYNCHRONIZER (leader).

If a node receives a schedule from a neighbor before choosing its own schedule, it just follows this neighbor s schedule. This node is called a FOLLOWER -- it waits for a random delay (to reduce medium contention) and then broadcasts its schedule. If a node receives a neighbor s schedule after it selects its own schedule, it adopts both schedules (by merging their listening times).

Rules for Adding a New Node Listen for a long time until an active node is discovered Send INTRO packet to the active node Active node forwards its schedule table Treat all the nodes on table as potential neighbors and contact them later If possible, follow the synchronizer s schedule, else establish a random schedule and broadcast that schedule

Maintaining Synchronization Timer synchronization among neighbors is needed to prevent the clock drift. Done by periodic updating, using a SYNC packet (next time to sleep). Updating period can be quite long -- as we don t require tight synchronization. Synchronizer needs to periodically send SYNCs to its followers. If a follower has a neighbor that has a different schedule from it, it also needs to update that neighbor.

Time of next sleep is relative to the moment that the sender finishes transmitting the SYNC packet Receivers will adjust their timer counters immediately after they receive the SYNC packet Listen interval is divided into two parts: one for receiving SYNC and other for receiving RTS

Timing Relationship of Possible Situations

Collision Avoidance Similar to IEEE 802.11 using RTS/CTS mechanism Perform carrier sense, before initiating a transmission If a node fails to get the medium, it goes to sleep and wakes up when the receiver is free and listening again Broadcast packets are sent without RTS/CTS Unicast packets follow the sequence of RTS/CTS/DATA/ACK between the sender and receiver

Overhearing Avoidance Duration field in each transmitted packet indicates how long the remaining transmission will be. So if a node hears a packet destined o another node, it knows how long it has to keep silent. The node records this value in network allocation vector (NAV) and sets a timer.

When a node has data to send, it first looks at NAV. If NAV is not zero, then the medium is busy (virtual carrier sense). Medium is determined as free if both virtual and physical carrier sense indicate the medium is free. All immediate neighbors of both the sender and receiver should sleep after they hear RTS or CTS packet until the current transmission is over.

Message Passing A message is a collection of meaningful, interrelated units of data Transmitting a long message as a single packet is potentially expensive, as the re-transmission cost is high if a failure happens On the other hand, fragmentation into small packets will lead to high control overhead as each packet should contend using RTS/CTS

SMAC Solution Fragment message in to small packets and transmit them as a burst (but wait for ACK after each packet) Advantages Reduces latency of the message Reduces control overhead Disadvantage Node-to-node fairness is reduced, as nodes with small packets to send have to wait till the message burst is transmitted

SMAC Performance

IEEE 802.15.4 (ZigBee) Targeted at home and building automation and controls, consumer electronics, PC peripherals, medical monitoring, and toys SHORT < RANGE > LONG TEXT GRAPHICS INTERNET HI-FI AUDIO ZigBee Bluetooth 2 Bluetooth1 STREAMING VIDEO 802.11b DIGITAL VIDEO MULTI-CHANNEL VIDEO 802.11a/HL2 & 802.11g LAN PAN LOW < DATA RATE > HIGH

ZigBee Application Space security HVAC AMR lighting control access control BUILDING AUTOMATION CONSUMER ELECTRONICS TV VCR DVD/CD remote patient monitoring fitness monitoring PERSONAL HEALTH CARE PC & PERIPHERALS mouse keyboard joystick asset mgt process control environmental energy mgt INDUSTRIAL CONTROL RESIDENTIAL/ LIGHT COMMERCIAL CONTROL security HVAC lighting control access control lawn & garden irrigation

IEEE 802.15.4 Basics 802.15.4 is a simple packet data protocol for lightweight wireless networks Channel Access is via Carrier Sense Multiple Access (CSMA) with collision avoidance and optional time slotting Message acknowledgement and an optional beacon structure Multi-level security Three bands, 27 channels specified 2.4 GHz: 16 channels, 250 kbps 868.3 MHz : 1 channel, 20 kbps 902-928 MHz: 10 channels, 40 kbps Range varies with power, up to hundreds of meters Works well for Long battery life, selectable latency for controllers, sensors, remote monitoring and portable electronics Configured for maximum battery life, has the potential to last as long as the shelf life of most batteries Zigbee motes operate at 250kbs, range 20-30 m indoors, 75-100 m outdoors

Even Newer Protocols BMAC (Polastre, Hill, Culler Sensys04) BMAC is about 4.5 faster than SMACunicast Not as fast when ACK or RTS/CTS is used No combined results... Differences less pronounced as # of nodes increases Throughput (bps) 16000 14000 12000 10000 8000 6000 4000 2000 B-MAC B-MAC w/ ACK B-MAC w/ RTS-CTS S-MAC unicast S-MAC broadcast Channel Capacity 0 0 5 10 15 20 0 Number of nodes 1 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 Percentage of Channel Capacity

Routing Information in Sensor Networks

Routing in Sensor Networks Routing protocols in communication networks obtain route information between pairs of nodes wishing to communicate. Such protocols can be proactive: the protocol maintains routing tables at each node that are updated as changes in the network topology are detected reactive: the protocol constructs paths on demand only Because of the high rate of topology changes, reactive protocols are much more appropriate for sensor networks Several such protocols have already been developed for ad hoc mobile communication networks. Examples are: Ad hoc on demand distance vector routing (AODV) Dynamic source routing (DSR) both, however, flood the network to discover paths

Geographic Routing In sensor networks routing is frequently based on a node s attributes and sensed data, rather that on some pre-assigned network address. Geographic routing uses a node s location to discover paths to that node We assume that nodes know their geographic location nodes know their 1-hop neighbors routing destinations are specified geographically (a point, a region) each packet can hold a small amount (O(1)) of additional routing info to record where it has been on the network most of the time we will model the connectivity graph of the nodes as a unit distance graph

Greedy Methods t t s s? In a greedy method, each node forwards a packet to its best neighbor Note that no flooding is involved for route discovery Greedy methods can get stuck at dead-ends

Greedy Unicast Geographic Routing To go from source s to destination t, at each intermediate node x advance to the neighbor y that makes most progress towards t. greedy distance routing (GPSR) compass routing s x y t

Neighbor Choice d compass routing y y greedy distance routing x

Greedy Protocols Can Get The intermediate node x can be a local optimum towards the destination In general, local optima will arise if the node graph contains holes areas with no sensor nodes To prove that such situations cannot happen we need to assume special properties about the connectivity graph G Stuck

Delaunay Triangulations (DT) In a Delaunay triangulation (dual to the Voronoi diagram of the nodes), packets cannot get stuck However, unless the nodes are spaced very closely, it is unlikely that the UDG will contain all DT edges

Measures of Path Quality First and foremost, a protocol should guarantee packed delivery, whenever such delivery is possible Second, the quality of the path produced should be good when compared to the optimal path available. Different path costs can be used: d c( ) l ( e), e d0,1,2,3,4,... d = 0, hop length d = 1, normal path length d = 2, 3, 4..., energy costs These can be made roughly equivalent by assuming a constant node density or a minimum node spacing This can be attained by a node clustering process

Planarizations A planar straight-line graph has no crossing edges. It subdivides the plane into regions called faces.

Planarizations of the Routing To guarantee packet delivery, it may be advantageous to disable some connections, so as to make the routing graph planar On a planar graph, perimeter routing guarantees delivery Another variant is other face routing The quality of paths can be bad, however Graph

Perimeter/Face Routing Properties All necessary information is stored in the message Source and destination positions are given Point of transition to next face needs to be chosen Right Hand Rule Completely local: Knowledge about direct neighbors positions sufficient Faces are implicit, only local neighbor ordering around each node is needed

Adaptive Algorithms We want the quality of paths we discover to be nearly optimal Alternatively, we want to discover optimal paths without searching the whole connectivity graph G If the optimal path between s and t has length L, then every node in that path is within an ellipse with foci s and t defined by L. This ellipse limits the part of G to be searched. If L is not known, it can be guessed, approximately s t

Geometric Graphs defined by local rules? distributed construction? path quality (spanning property)? Gabriel Graph Restricted Delaunay Graph (RDG) Relative Neighborhood Graph (RNG)

Larger RNG and GB Examples Relative Neighborhood Graph Gabriel Graph

Average Path Quality Not interesting when graph not dense enough Not interesting when graph is too dense Critical density range ( percolation ) Shortest path is significantly longer than Euclidean distance too sparse critical density too dense

Critical Density: Shortest Path vs. Euclidean Distance Shortest path is significantly longer than Euclidean distance

Randomly Generated Graphs: Critical Density Range 1.9 1 Shortest Path Span 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.2 Connectivity Greedy success Shortest Path Span 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 Frequency 1.1 critical 1 0 5 10 15 0.1 0 Network Density [nodes per unit disk]

Combining Greedy and Planarization Strategies: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR) [Karp and Kung, 2000]: Planarize the connectivity graph G Use greedy distance protocol on the full graph G If stuck, switch to perimeter protocol on the planarization of G, until a node closer to the destination than the stuck node is encountered

GPSR Performance

Routing on a Curve Packets can be given a trajectory to follow in terms of a parametric curve c( t) x( t), y( t) A sequence of nodes approximating c can be selected according to various criteria Method is robust to node failures

Conclusions The lower levels of the protocol stack can be adapted to sensor networks so as to minimize collision and overhearing overheads and allow nodes to sleep when they are not needed. Knowledge of the nodes locations enables many powerful mechanisms for message transport and route discovery that avoid expensive flooding operations yet require no routing tables or other high-maintenance data structures.

The End