Lecture 5
Routing protocols In wireless sensor
network
Dr. Tarek Mohamed Salem
Egypt 2022
Outline
• Routing Challenges and Design Issues in
WSNs
• Flat Routing
• Hierarchical Routing
• Location Based Routing
2
Routing Challenges and Design Issues in
WSNs
o Node deployment
o Energy considerations
o Data delivery model
o Node/link heterogeneity
o Fault tolerance
o Scalability
o Network dynamics
o Transmission media
o Connectivity
o Coverage
o Data aggregation/convergecast
3
Data Delivery Model
• Time-driven (continuous)
o Suitable for applications that require periodic
data monitoring
• Event-driven
o React immediately to sudden and drastic
changes
• Query-driven
o Respond to a query generated by the BS or
another node in the network
• Hybrid
• The routing protocol is highly influenced
by the data reporting method
4
Node/Link Heterogeneity
• Depending on the application, a sensor
node can have a different role or
capability.
• The existence of a heterogeneous set of
sensors raises many technical issues
related to data routing.
• Even data reading and reporting can be
generated from these sensors at different
rates, subject to diverse QoS constraints,
and can follow multiple data reporting
models.
5
Quality of Service
• In many applications, conservation of
energy, which is directly related to
network lifetime.
• As energy is depleted, the network may be
required to reduce the quality of results in
order to reduce energy dissipation in the
nodes and hence lengthen the total
network lifetime.
6
Routing Protocols in WSNs: A
taxonomy
Routing protocols in WSNs
Network Structure Protocol Operation
Flat routing Negotiation based routing
• SPIN • SPIN
• Directed Diffusion (DD) Multi-path network routing
Hierarchical routing • DD
• LEACH Query based routing
• PEGASIS • DD, Data centric routing
• TTDD QoS based routing
Location based routing • TBP, SPEED
• GAF Coherent based routing
• GPSR • DD
Aggregation
• Data Mules, CTCCAP
7
I. Flat routing
SPIN -Motivation
• Sensor Protocols for Information via
Negotiation, SPIN
o A Negotiation-Based Protocols for
Disseminating Information in Wireless Sensor
Networks.
• Dissemination is the process of distributing
individual sensor observations to the
whole network, treating all sensors as sink
nodes
o Replicate complete view of the environment
o Enhance fault tolerance
o Broadcast critical piece of information 9
SPIN (cont.)- Motivation
• Flooding is the classic approach for
dissemination
• Source node sends data to all neighbors
• Receiving node stores and sends data to
all its neighbors
• Disseminate data quickly
• Deficiencies
o Implosion
o Overlap
o Resource blindness
10
SPIN (cont.)-Implosion
Node
x x
The direction
of data sending
The connect
between nodes
B C
x x
D
11
SPIN (cont.)- Overlap
r
q s
Node
The direction
of data sending
The connect
between nodes
The searching A B
range of the
node
(q, r) (s, r)
C
12
SPIN (cont.)-Resource
blindness
• In flooding, nodes do not modify their
activities based on the amount of energy
available to them.
• A network of embedded sensors can be
resource-aware and adapt its
communication and computation to the
state of its energy resource.
13
SPIN (cont.)
• Negotiation
o Before transmitting data, nodes negotiate with
each other to overcome implosion and overlap
o Only useful information will be transferred
o Observed data must be described by meta-data
• Resource adaptation
o Each sensor node has resource manager
o Applications probe manager before
transmitting or processing data
o Sensors may reduce certain activities when
energy is low
14
SPIN (cont.)- Meta-Data
• Completely describe the data
o Must be smaller than the actual data for SPIN
to be beneficial
o If you need to distinguish pieces of data, their
meta-data should differ
• Meta-Data is application specific
o Sensors may use their geographic location or
unique node ID
o Camera sensor may use coordinate and
orientation
15
SPIN (cont.)- Three-stage handshake
protocol
o ADV – data advertisement
• Node that has data to share can advertise
this by transmitting an ADV with meta-data
attached
o REQ – request for data
• Node sends a request when it wishes to
receive some actual data
o DATA – data message
• Contain actual sensor data with a meta-data
header
• Usually much bigger than ADV or REQ
messages
16
SPIN (Sensor Protocols for
Information via Negotiation)
SPIN (cont.)- Conclusion
• SPIN protocols hold the promise of achieving high
performance at a low cost in terms of complexity,
energy, computation, and communication
• Pros
o Each node only needs to know its one-hop
neighbors
o Significantly reduce energy consumption compared
to flooding
• Cons
o Data advertisement cannot guarantee the delivery
of data
• If the node interested in the data are far from
the source, data will not be delivered
• Not good for applications requiring reliable data
delivery, e.g., intrusion detection
18
Direct Diffusion:
Motivation
• Properties of Sensor Networks
o Data centric
o No central authority
o Resource constrained
o Nodes are tied to physical locations
o Nodes may not know the topology
o Nodes are generally stationary
• How can we get data from the sensors?
Directed Diffusion:
Main Features
• Data centric
o Individual nodes are unimportant
• Request driven
o Sinks place requests as interests
o Sources satisfying the interest can be found
o Intermediate nodes route data toward sinks
• Localized repair and reinforcement
• Multi-path delivery for multiple sources,
sinks, and queries
Directed Diffusion: Motivating
Example
• Sensor nodes are monitoring animals
• Users are interested in receiving data for all 4-
legged creatures seen in a rectangle
• Users specify the data rate
Directed Diffusion: Interest and Event
Naming
• Query/interest:
1. Type=four-legged animal
2. Interval=20ms (event data rate)
3. Duration=10 seconds (time to cache)
4. Rect=[-100, 100, 200, 400]
• Reply:
1. Type=four-legged animal
2. Instance = elephant
3. Location = [125, 220]
4. Intensity = 0.6
5. Confidence = 0.85
6. Timestamp = [Link]
• Attribute-Value pairs, no advanced naming
scheme
Directed Diffusion: Interest
Propagation
• Flood interest
• Constrained or Directional flooding based on location is
possible
• Directional propagation based on previously cached data
Gradient
Source Interest
Sink
Directed Diffusion: Data Propagation
• Multipath routing
o Consider each gradient’s link quality
Gradient
Source Data
Sink
Directed Diffusion: Reinforcement
• Reinforce one of the neighbor after receiving
initial data.
o Neighbor who consistently performs better than others
o Neighbor from whom most events received
Gradient
Source Data
Reinforcement
Sink
Directed Diffusion: Negative
Reinforcement
• Explicitly degrade the path by re-sending interest with
lower data rate.
• Time out: Without periodic reinforcement, a gradient will be
torn down
Gradient
Source Data
Reinforcement
Sink
Directed Diffusion: Summary of the
protocol
Directed Diffusion:
Pros & Cons
• Different from SPIN in terms of on-demand data querying
mechanism
o Sink floods interests only if necessary
• A lot of energy savings
o In SPIN, sensors advertise the availability of data
• Pros
o Data centric: All communications are neighbor to neighbor with
no need for a node addressing mechanism
o Each node can do aggregation & caching
• Cons
o On-demand, query-driven: Inappropriate for applications
requiring continuous data delivery, e.g., environmental
monitoring
o Attribute-based naming scheme is application dependent
• For each application it should be defined a priori
• Extra processing overhead at sensor nodes
II.
Hierarchical
Routing
LEACH
• LEACH (Low-Energy Adaptive Clustering
Hierarchy), a clustering-based protocol that
minimizes energy dissipation in sensor
networks.
• LEACH outperforms classical clustering
algorithms by using adaptive clusters and
rotating cluster-heads, allowing the energy
requirements of the system to be distributed
among all the sensors.
• LEACH is able to perform local computation in
each cluster to reduce the amount of data that
must be transmitted to the base station.
• LEACH uses a CDMA/TDMA MAC to reduce inter-
30
cluster and intra-cluster collisions.
LEACH (cont.)
• Sensors elect themselves to be local cluster-
heads at any given time with a certain
probability.
• Each sensor node joins a cluster-head that
requires the minimum communication energy.
• Once all the nodes are organized into clusters,
each cluster-head creates a transmission
schedule for the nodes in its cluster.
• In order to balance the energy consumption,
the cluster-head nodes are not fixed; rather,
this position is self-elected at different time
intervals.
31
LEACH
100 m
叢 集 區
觀 測 區 域
~100m
Sensor (Non Cluster Head)
Sensor (Cluster Head)
Initial Data
Aggregated Data
Base Station 32
LEACH: Adaptive
Clustering
• Periodic independent self-election
o Probabilistic
• CSMA MAC used to advertise
• Nodes select advertisement with strongest
signal strength
• Dynamic TDMA cycles
All nodes marked with a given symbol belong to the same cluster, and
the cluster head nodes are marked with a ●.
33
Algorithm
• Periodic process
• Two phases per round:
o Setup phase
• Advertisement: Execute election algorithm
• Members join to cluster
• Cluster-head broadcasts schedule
o Steady-State phase
• Data transmission to cluster-head using
TDMA
• Cluster-head transfers data to BS (Base
Station)
34
Algorithm (cont.)
Fixed-length cycle
Setup phase Steady-state phase
Time slot Time slot Time slot
1 2 3
Advertisement phase Cluster setup phase Broadcast schedule
Self-election of cluster
heads Members Cluster head Broadcast
Cluster heads compete compete with CDMA code to members
with CSMA CSMA
35 35
LEACH
o Pros
• Distributed, no global knowledge required
• Energy saving due to aggregation by CHs
o Shortcomings
• LEACH assumes all nodes can transmit with enough
power to reach BS if necessary (e.g., elected as CHs)
• Each node should support both TDMA & CDMA
o Extension of LEACH [5]
• High level negotiation, similar to SPIN
• Only data providing new info is transmitted to BS
Comparison between SPIN, LEACH &
Directed Diffusion
SPIN LEACH Directed
Diffusion
Optimal No No Yes
Route
Network Good Very good Good
Lifetime
Resource Yes Yes Yes
Awarenes
s
Use of Yes No Yes
meta-data
