1 gpsr: greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks b. karp, h. t. kung borrowed slides...
TRANSCRIPT
1
GPSR: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless Networks
B. Karp, H. T. Kung
Borrowed slides from Richard Yang
2
Motivation
A sensor net consists of hundreds or thousands of nodes Scalability is the issue Existing ad hoc net protocols, e.g., DSR, AODV, ZRP,
require nodes to cache e2e route information Dynamic topology changes Mobility
Reduce caching overhead Hierarchical routing is usually based on well defined,
rarely changing administrative boundaries Geographic routing
• Use location for routing
3
Scalability metrics
Routing protocol msg cost How many control packets sent?
Per node state How much storage per node is required?
E2E packet delivery success rate
4
Assumptions
Every node knows its location Positioning devices like GPS Localization
A source can get the location of the destination
802.11 MACLink bidirectionality
5
Geographic Routing: Greedy Routing
S D
Closest to D
A
- Find neighbors who are the closer to the destination- Forward the packet to the neighbor closest to the destination
6
Benefits of GF
A node only needs to remember the location info of one-hop neighbors
Routing decisions can be dynamically made
7
Greedy Forwarding does NOT always work
If the network is dense enough that each interior node has a neighbor in every 2/3 angular sector, GF will always succeed
GF fails
8
Dealing with Void: Right-Hand Rule
Apply the right-hand rule to traverse the edges of a void Pick the next anticlockwise edge Traditionally used to get out of a maze
9
Right Hand Rule on Convex Subdivision
For convex subdivision, right hand rule is equivalent to traversing the face with the crossing edges removed.
10
Right-Hand Rule Does Not Work with Cross Edges
u
z
w
D
x
x originates a packet to u
Right-hand rule results in the tour x-u-z-w-u-x
11
Remove Crossing Edge
u
z
w
D
x
Make the graph planar
Remove (w,z) from the graph
Right-hand rule results in the tour x-u-z-v-x
12
Make a Graph Planar
Convert a connectivity graph to planar non-crossing graph by removing “bad” edges Ensure the original graph will not be
disconnected Two types of planar graphs:
• Relative Neighborhood Graph (RNG)• Gabriel Graph (GG)
13
Relative Neighborhood Graph
Connection uv can exist if w u, v, d(u,v) < max[d(u,w),d(v,w)] not empty
remove uv
14
Gabriel Graph
An edge (u,v) exists between vertices u and v if no other vertex w is present within the circle whose diameter is uv.
w u, v, d2(u,v) < [d2(u,w) + d2(v,w)]Not empty remove uv
15
Properties of GG and RNG
RNG is a sub-graph of GG Because RNG removes more
edges
If the original graph isconnected, RNG is also connected
RNG
GG
16
Connectedness of RNG Graph
Key observation Any edge on the minimum
spanning tree of the originalgraph is not removed
Proof by contradiction: Assume (u,v) is such an edge but removed in RNG
u v
w
17
• 200 nodes
• randomly placed on a 2000 x 2000 meter region
• radio range of 250 m
•Bonus: remove redundant, competing path less collision
Full graph GG subset RNG subset
Examples
18
Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR)
Maintenance all nodes maintain a single-hop neighbor table Use RNG or GG to make the graph planar
At source: mode = greedy
Intermediate node: if (mode == greedy) {
greedy forwarding;if (fail) mode = perimeter;
}if (mode == perimeter) {
if (have left local maxima) mode = greedy; else (right-hand rule);
}
19
GPSR
Greedy Forwarding Perimeter Forwarding
greedy fails
have left local maximagreedy works greedy fails
20
Implementation Issues
Graph planarization RNG & GG planarization depend on having the
current location info of a node’s neighbors Mobility may cause problems Re-planarize when a node enters or leaves the
radio range• What if a node only moves in the radio range?• To avoid this problem, the graph should be re-
planarize for every beacon msg Also, assumes a circular radio transmission
model In general, it could be harder & more
expensive than it sounds
21
Performance evaluation
Simulation in ns-2 Baseline: DSR (Dynamic Source Routing Random waypoint model
A node chooses a destination uniformly at random
Choose velocity uniformly at random in the configurable range – simulated max velocity 20m/s
A node pauses after arriving at a waypoint – 300, 600 & 900 pause times
22
50, 112 & 200 nodes 22 sending nodes & 30 flows About 20 neighbors for each node – very
dense CBR (2Kbps)
Nominal radio range: 250m (802.11 WaveLan radio)
Each simulation takes 900 seconds Take an average of the six different
randomly generated motion patterns
23
Packet Delivery Success Rate
24
Routing Protocol Overhead
25
Related Work
Geographic and Energy Aware Routing (GEAR), UCLA Tech Report, 2000 Consider remaining energy in addition to
geographic location to avoid quickly draining energy of the node closest to the destination
Geographic probabilistic routing, International workshop on wireless ad-hoc networks, 2005 Determine the packet forwarding probability
to each neighbor based on its location, residual energy, and link reliability
26
Beacon vector routing, NSDI 2005 Beacons know their locations Forward a packet towards the beacon
A Scalable Location Service for Geographic Ad Hoc Routing, MobiCom ’00 Distributed location service
Landmark routing Paul F. Tsuchiya. Landmark routing: Architecture,
algorithms and issues. Technical Report MTR-87W00174, MITRE Corporation, September 1987.
Classic work with many follow-ups
27
Questions?