international journal of modern computer science … · international journal of modern computer...

International Journal of Modern Computer Science (IJMCS) ISSN: 2320-7868 (Online) Volume 4, Issue 6, December, 2016

RES Publication © 2012 Page | 13 http://ijmcs.info

An Efficient (EEMRP) Protocol for MANET

Sanjay Kumar Sahani 1

Computer science and Information Technology

SHIATS, Allahabad (UP)

Email [email protected]

Raghav Yadav 2

Associate Professor(CSIT)

SHIATS, Allahabad (UP)

Email [email protected]

Abstract-Saving energy and increasing network lifetime are significant challenges in the field of MANET. Energy-aware routing

protocols have been introduced for MANET to overcome limitations of MANET. The Ad hoc On-demand Distance Vector (AODV)

and the cluster-tree routing protocols. These protocols are implemented to establish the network, form clusters, and transfer data

between the nodes. The AODV and the a new protocol energy efficient mobile routing protocol(EEMRP) are two of the most

efficient routing protocols in terms of reducing the control message overhead, reducing the bandwidth usage in the network, and

reducing the power consumption of MANET compared to other routing protocols. All the aforementioned approaches contribute in

increasing the lifetime of the MANET, and distributing the power consumption among the MANET. We demonstrated proposed

techniques through simulations accomplished using NS-2 simulator. All the simulation results have verified the remarkable

improvement of performance in term of reducing the power consumption rate and increasing the lifetime of the MANET, Compared

with the original AODV and energy efficient mobile routing protocol (EEMRP).

Keywords: MANET, Energy-aware Routing Protocols, Network Lifetime, Energy Consumption Rate, AODV, EEMRP.

I. INTRODUCTION In MANET, each node acts as both host and router. That is it

is autonomous in behaviour. Multi-hop radio relaying- When a

source node and destination node for a message is out of the

radio range, the MANETs are capable of multi-hop routing.

Distributed nature of operation for security, routing and host

configuration; A centralized firewall is absent here. The nodes

can join or leave the network anytime, making the network

topology dynamic in nature. Mobile nodes are characterized

with less memory, power and light weight features. The

reliability, efficiency, stability and capacity of wireless links

are often inferior when compared with wired links. This shows

the fluctuating link bandwidth of wireless links. Mobile and

spontaneous behaviour which demands minimum human

intervention to configure the network. All nodes have identical

features with similar responsibilities and capabilities and

hence it forms a completely symmetric environment. High

user density and large level of user mobility. Nodal

connectivity is intermittent.

1.1 Wireless standards the wireless standards that we will

investigate in this paper is only a selection from all the

standards available. These explanations are not meant to be

exhaustive.

1.2 IEEE 802.11 - WLAN/Wi-Fi

Wireless LAN (WLAN, also known as Wi-Fi) is a set of low

tier, terrestrial, network technologies for data communication.

The WLAN standards operate on the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz

Industrial, Science and Medical (ISM) frequency bands. It is

specified by the IEEE 802.11 standard.

1.3 IEEE 802.15.1 - Bluetooth

The IEEE 802.15.1 standard [3] is the basis for the Bluetooth

wireless communication technology. Bluetooth is a low tier,

ad hoc, terrestrial, wireless standard for short range

communication. It is designed for small and low cost devices

with low power consumption. The technology operates with

three different classes of devices: Class 1, class 2 and class 3

where the range is about 100 meters, 10 meters and 1 meter

respectively. Wireless LAN operates in the same 2.4 GHz

frequency band as Bluetooth.

1.4 IEEE 802.15.4 –Zig Bee

Zig Bee is a low tier, ad hoc, terrestrial, wireless standard in

some ways similar to Bluetooth. The IEEE 802.15.4 standard

[4] is commonly known as Zig Bee, but Zig Bee has some

features in addition to those of 802.15.4. It operates in the 868

MHz, 915 MHz and 2.4 GHz ISM bands. It explain some of

the differences and similarities between the IEEE 802.11,

802.15.1, 802.15.4 and 802.15.6 wireless standards with an

emphasis on the physical layer. Modes of operation Wireless

networks can have to distinct modes of operation: Ad hoc and

infrastructure. Infrastructure wireless networks usually have

some kind of base station1 which acts as a central node which

connects the wireless terminals. The base station is usually

provided in order to enable access to the Internet, an intranet

or other wireless networks. Most of the time the base stations

have a fixed location, but certain mobile base stations also

exist. The disadvantage over ad hoc networks is that the base

station is a central point of failure. If it stops working none of

the wireless terminals can communicate with each other.

1.5 Background on IEEE 802.15.4

An IEEE 802.15.4 network comprises one PAN coordinator

and a set of devices. These low-power devices are

characterized by a limited transmission range and a limited

quantity of energy. The IEEE has proposed the IEEE 802.15.4

to govern the medium access in this kind of networks,

presented in [3]. The protocol uses a PAN coordinator, inter-

connecting the WSN to e.g. the Internet. Although IEEE

802.15.4 was originally designed for single hop networks, the

working group has proposed topologies to cope with multi-

hop applications (Figure 1).



Star: The PAN coordinator is in the radio range of all other

nodes (i.e. each node forms a branch of the star). Single hop

transmissions are in this case sufficient. 15

Full function device

Reduced function device

Communications flow

Master/Slave

PANCoordinator

IEEE802.15.4 – Star Topology

Thomas Watteyne @ EDERC 2010

Peer-to-peer: A node may communicate with any neighbor,

the structure being decentralized. A routing protocol may

enable multihop communications, using P2P transmissions at

the MAC layer. 16

Full function device Communications flow

Point to point Cluster tree

IEEE802.15.4 – P2P Topology


Cluster-tree: A tree is constructed, rooted at the PAN

coordinator. All the non-leaf-nodes are designated as

coordinators since they may forward the traffic to or from the

root. 17

Full function device

Reduced function device

Communications flow

Clustered stars - for example,cluster nodes exist between roomsof a hotel and each room has a star network for control.

IEEE802.15.4 – Combined Topology


1.6 MAC mechanisms

In these topologies, IEEE 802.15.4 may work either in non-

beacon or in beacon-enabled mode. The MAC strategy

impacts the duty-cycle and thus the capacity and energy

consumption. In IEEE 802.15.4, one set of nodes (the

coordinators) regulates the transmissions. Any exchange is

initiated from the non-coordinator to the coordinator. In

particular, the coordinator buffers all the packets destined to

others.

II. RELATED WORKS

The optimized routing mechanism works at the network layer

and optimize the decision based on the physical parameters

translated as forwarding metrics. The physical parameters are

the PRR and remaining power. The forwarding metrics is used

to get an optimal decision. The forwarding metrics are

requested only during neighbor discovery and network

initialization phase. Some review to the optimized routing

mechanism

Joseph Polastre 2004: We propose B-MAC, a carrier sense

media access protocol for wireless sensor networks that

provides a flexible interface to obtain ultra-low power

operation, effective collision avoidance, and high channel

utilization. To achieve low power operation, B-MAC employs

an adaptive preamble sampling scheme to reduce duty cycle

and minimize idle listening.

Ilker Demirkol 2006: Various medium-access control (MAC)

protocols with different objectives have been proposed for

wireless sensor networks. In this article, we first outline the

sensor network properties that are crucial for the design of

MAC layer protocols. Then, we describe several MAC

protocols proposed for sensor networks, emphasizing their

strengths and weaknesses.

Meng-Shiuan Pan 2007:ZigBee is a communication standard

which is considered to be suitable for wireless sensor

networks. In ZigBee, a device (with a permanent 64-bit MAC

address) is said to join a network if it can successfully obtain a

16-bit network address from a parent device.

Jan Magne Tjensvold 2007: It explain some of the

differences and similarities between the IEEE 802.11,

802.15.1, 802.15.4and 802.15.6 wireless standards with an

emphasis on the physical layer.

Changsu Suh 2008: IEEE 802.15.4 MAC includes features

such as its dual operational modes (Non-Beacon-enabled

mode/Beacon- enabled mode), which make this standard more

attractive for providing multimedia services over the

networked sensors. Its Beacon-enabled mode can conserve

energy by using the RF sleep mechanism, but it is limited by

the lower data throughput.

Dr.S.S.Riaz Ahamed 2009: ZigBee is an IEEE 802.15.4

standard for data communications with business and consumer

devices. It is designed around low-power consumption

allowing batteries to essentially last forever. The ZigBee

standard provides network, security, and application support

services operating on top of the IEEE 802.15.4 Medium

MacAccess Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY)

wireless standard.



Sukhvinder S 2010: This paper investigates the performance

of WPAN based on various topological scenarios like: cluster,

star and ring. The comparative results have been reported for

the performance metrics like: Throughput, Traffic sent, Traffic

received and Packets dropped.

Sukhvinder S Bamber 2010: The main objective of this

paper is to investigate the performance trade off with MSK,

BPSK and QAM_64 modulation techniques. Investigations

have been reported to compare the performance and tradeoffs

of MSK, BPSK and QAM_64 modulation schemes.

Yasser Gadallah 2010: The IEEE 802.15.4 standard was

developed for the purpose of media access control of low

power wireless personal area networks. Wireless sensor

network devices have the general characteristics of low power

capabilities and operation.

Sri Sai Krishna Pradeep 2011: we considered minimizing

energy consumption with and providing QoS in WSN which is

very important nowadays. In this work we developed a cross-

layer protocol that operated with MAC and network layer, it

introduces QoS and wake and sleep states.

M.E. Haque2012: paper presents a comprehensive review of

wireless sensor and fiber optic sensor for SHM and

challenging issue related to the structural health monitoring. It

also introduces research challenges and potential applications

of the WSN.\

M. M. Chandane 2012: Wireless Sensor Network (WSN)

consists of a large population of sensor nodes capable of

computation, communication and sensing. Limited storage,

processing, and transmission power are inherent limitations of

WSN. IEEE 802.15.4 is a new standard, uniquely designed for

low rate Wireless Personal Area Network (LR-WPAN),

developed for applications that demand low throughput.

Ms. Sonal J. Rane 2013: Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)

are an important class of services supported by the IEEE

802.15.4 standard. Time critical application of WSN can be

fulfilled by the IEEE 802.15.4 standard through Guaranteed

Time Slot (GTS) mechanism. The GTS is activated in the

beacon-enabled mode based on the super frame structure

Jianliang Zheng: IEEE 802.15.4 is a new standard uniquely

designed for low rate wireless personal area networks

(LRWPANs). It targets low data rate, low power consumption

and low cost wireless networking, and offers device level

wireless connectivity. We develop an NS2 simulator for IEEE

802.15.4 and conduct several sets of experiments.

III. PROTOCOL OPRATION

3.2 EEMRP (Energy Efficient Mobile Routing) protocol

3.2.1: Overview

We propose a proactive routing protocol for mobile ad hoc

networks, which we call as Energy Efficient Mobile Routing

(EEMRP). The protocol inherits the stability of the link state

algorithm. Due to its proactive nature ,it has an advantage of

having the routes immediately available when neighbor node

are declared and are flood in the entire networks. EEMRP

protocol is an optimization of a pure links state protocol for

mobile ad hoc Networks. First, it reduces the size of control

packets: instead of all links, it declares only a subset of. Links

with its neighbor who are its multipoint relay selection

.secondly it minimized flooding of this control traffic by using

only the selection node called multipoint relays, to different its

message in the network. Only the multipoint relays of a node

retransmit its broadcast messages. This technique significantly

reduces the number of retransmissions in a flooding or

broadcast procedure. A part from normal periodic control

messages, the protocol does not generate extra control traffic

in response to link failures and additions. The protocol keeps

the routes for all the destinations in the network; hence it is

beneficial for the traffic patterns where a large subset of nodes

is communicating with each other, and the [source,

destination] pairs are also changing with time. The protocol is

particularly suitable for large and dense network, as the

optimization done using the multipoint relays works well in

this context. More dense and large a network is, more

optimization is achieved as compared to the normal link state

algorithm. The protocol is designed to work in a completely

distributed manner and thus does not depend upon any central

entity. The protocol does not require a reliable transmission

for its control messages periodically, and can therefore sustain

a loss of some packets from time to time, which happens very

often in radio network due to collisions or other transmission

problems. The protocol also does not need an in-order delivery

of its messages: each control message contains a sequence

number of most recent information; therefore the re-ordering

at the receiving end cannot make the old information

interpreted as the recent one. EEMRP protocol performs hop

by hop routing, i.e. each node uses its most recent information

to route packet. Therefore, when a node is moving its packets

can be successfully delivered to it, if its speed is such that its

movement could be followed in its neighborhood, at least. The

protocol thus supports a nodal mobility that can be traced

through its local control messages, which depends upon the

frequency of these messages.

3.2.2 Multipoint relays.

The idea of multipoint relays is to minimize the flooding of

broadcast packets in the network by reducing duplicate

retransmissions in the same region. Each mode in the network

selects a set of nodes in its neighborhood, which retransmit its

packets. This set of selected neighbor nodes is called the

multipoint relays (MPRs) of that node. The neighbors of any

node N which are not in its MPR set, read and process the

packet but do not retransmit the broadcast packet received

from node N. For this purpose, each node maintains a set of its

neighbor which called the MPR selectors of the node. Every

broadcast message coming from these MPR selectors of a

node is assumed to be retransmitted by that node. This set can

change over time, which is indicated by the selector nodes in

their HELLO messages. Each node selects its multipoint relay



set among its one neighbors in such a manner that the set

covers (in terms of radio range) all the nodes that are two hops

away. The multipoint relay set of node N, called MPR (N), is

an arbitrary subset of the neighborhood of N which satisfies

the following condition: every node in the two hop

neighborhood of N must have a bidirectional link toward MPR

(N).The smaller is the multipoint relay set, the more optimal is

the routing protocol. Figure 1 shows the multipoint relay

selection around mode N.

Multipoint relays

EEMRP protocol relies on the selection of multipoint relays,

and calculates its routes to all known destinations through

these nodes, i.e. MPR nodes are selected as intermediate nodes

in the path. To implement this scheme, each node in the

network periodically broadcast the information about its one-

hop neighbors which hope selected it as a multipoint relay.

Upon receipt of this MPR selectors’ information, each made

calculates and updates its routes to each known destination.

Therefore, the route is sequence of hops through the relays

from source to destination.

Multipoint relays are selected among the one hop neighbors

with a bi-directional link. There- fore, selecting the route

through multipoint relays automatically avoids the problems

associated with data packet transfer on un-directional links.

Such problems may consist of getting an acknowledgment for

data packets at each hop which cannot be received if there is

an un-directional .ink in the selected route.

3.3: Protocol functioning:

3.3.1Neighbor sensing

Each node must detect the neighbor nodes with which it has a

direct and bi-directional link. The uncertainties over radio

propagation may make some links un-directional.

Consequently, all links must be checked in both directions in

order to be considered valid. To accomplish this, each node

periodically broadcasts its HELLO messages, containing the

information about its neighbors and their link status. These are

received by all one-hop neighbors, but they are not relayed to

further nodes. A HELLO messages contains:. The list of

address of the neighbor to which are heard by this mode (a

HELLO has been received) but the link is not yet validated as

bi-directional: if a node finds its own address in a HELLO

message, it considers the link to the sender node as bi-

directional.

Remark: The lost of neighbors in the HELLO message can be

partial, the rule being that all predefined refreshing period.

Period These HELLO messages permit each node to learn the

knowledge of its neighbor up to two hops. On the basis of this

information, each node performs the selection of its multipoint

relays. These selected multipoint relays are indicated in the

HELLO message with the link status MPR on the reception of

HELLO messages, each mode can construct its MPR selector

table with the modes who have selected it as a multipoint

relays.

In the neighbor table, each node records the information about

its one hop neighbors the status of the link with these

neighbor, and a list of two hop neighbors that these one hop

neighbors give access to. The link status can be un-directional,

bi-directional or MPR. The link status as MPR implies that the

link with the neighbor node is bi-directional and that node is

also selected as a multipoint relay by this local node. Each

entry in the neighbor table has an associated holding time,

upon expiry of which it is no longer valid and hence removed.

The neighbor table also contains a sequence number value

which specifies the most recent MPR set that the local node

keeping this neighbor table has selected. Every time a node

selects of updates its MPR set, this sequence number is

incremented to a higher value.

3.3.2 Multipoint relay selection

Each node of the network selects independently its own set of

multipoint relays. The MPR set is calculated in a manner to

contain a subset of one hop neighbors which cover all two hop

neighbor i.e. the union of the neighbor sets of all MPRs

contains the entire two hop neighbor set. In order to build the

list of the two hop nodes from given node, it suffices to track

the list of bi-directional link nodes found in the HELLO

messages received by this node (this two-hop neighbor

information is stored in the neighbor table). The MPR set need

not be optimal; however it should be small enough to achieve

the benefits of multipoint relays. By default, the multipoint

relay set can coincide with the whole neighbor set. This will

be the case at network initialization. One possible algorithm

for selecting these MPRs is presented in, which is analyses in

and improved in.

Multipoint relays of a given node are declared in the

subsequent HELLOs transmitted by this node, so that the

information reaches the multipoint relays themselves. The

multipoint relay set is re-calculated when: A change in the

neighborhood is detected when either a bi-directional link with

a neighbor is failed, or a new neighbor with a bi-directional

link is added; of. A change in the two-hop neighbor set with

bi-directional link is detected. With information obtained

from the HELLO messages, each node also construct its MPR

selector table, in which it puts the addresses of this one hop

neighbor nodes which has selected it as a multipoint relay

along with the corresponding MPR sequence number is also

associated to the MPR selector table is most recently modified

with that sequence number. A node updates its MPR selector



set according to the information it receives in the HELLO

messages, and increment this sequence number on each

modification.

3.3.3MPR information declaration

In order to build the intra-forwarding database needed for

routing packets, each node broadcasts specific control

messages called Topology Control (TC) messages. TC

messages are forwarded like usual broadcast messages in the

entire network. This technique is similar to the link state

technique used in ARPANET, but it takes advantage of MPRs

which enable a better scalability of intra- formation.

A TC message is sent periodically by each node in the

network to declare its MPR selector set, i.e. the message

contains the list of neighbors who have selected the sender

node as a multipoint relay. The sequence number associated to

this MPR selector set is also attached to the lost. The loss of

addresses cam be partial in each TC message, but parsing must

be complete within a certain refreshing period. (In the list of

addresses is mandatorily exhaustive). The information

diffused in the network by these TC messages will help each

node to build its topology table. A node which has an empty

MPR selector set, i.e. nobody has selected it as a multipoint

relay, may not generate any TC message. The interval between

the transmissions of two TC messages depends upon whether

the MPR selector set is changed or not, since the last TC

message transmitted. When a change occurs in the MPR

selector set, the next TC May be sent earlier that the scheduled

time, but after some pre-specified minimum interval, starting

from the time the last TC message was sent. If this much time

has already elapsed, the next TC message may be transmitted

immediately. All subsequent TC messages are sent with the

normal default interval for sending TC messages, until the

MPR selector set is changed again.

Each node of the network maintains a topology table, in which

it records the information about the topology of the network

obtained from the TC messages. A node records information

about the multipoint relays of other nodes in this table. Based

on this information, the routing table is calculated. An entry in

the topology table consists of an address of a (potential)

destination (an MPR selector in the received TC message),

address of last-hop node to that destination (originator of the

TF message) and the corresponding MPR selector set

sequence number (of the sender node). It implies that the

destination node can be reached in the last hop through this

last-hop node. Each topology entry has an associated holding

time, upon expiry of which it is no longer valid and hence

removed. Upon receipt of a TC message, the following

proposed procedure may be executed to record the information

in the topology table:

1. If there exist some entry in the topology table whose last-

hop address corresponds to the originator address of the TC

message and the MPR selector sequence number in the

received message, then no further processing of this TC

message is done and it is silently discarded (case: packet

received out of order).

2. If there exist some entry in the topology table whose last-

hop address of the TC message and the MPR selector

sequence number in that entry is smaller than the sequence

number in the received message, then that topology entry is

removed.

3. For each of the MPR selector address received in the TC

message .If there exist some entry in the topology table whose

destination address corresponds to the MPS selector address

and the last-hop address of that entry corresponds to the

originator address of the TC message, then the holding time of

that entry is refreshed. Otherwise, a new topology entry is

recorded in the topology table.

3.3.4 Routing table calculation

Each node maintains a routing table which allows it to route

the packets for other destinations in the network. The nodes

which receive a TC message parse and store some of the

connected pairs of form [last-hop, node] where “nodes” are

the addresses found in the TC message list. The routing table

is built from this database by tracking the connected pairs in a

descending order. To find a path from a given origin to a

remote node an R, one has to find a connected (Y, X) and so

forth until one finds a node Y in the neighbor set of the origin.

Figure 2 explains this procedure of searching the [last- hop

destination] pairs in the topology table to get a complete,

connected route from source to destination. In order to restrict

to optimal paths, the forwarding nodes will select only the

connected pairs on the minimal path this selection can be done

dynamically and with minimal storage facilities. The sequence

numbers are used to detect connected pairs which have been

invalidated by further topology changes The information

contained in the intra-forwarding database (topology table),

which has not been refreshed is discarded. See section 5for

more details.

The route entries in the routing table consist of destination

address, next-hop address and estimated distance to

destination. The entries are recorded in the table for each

destination in the network for which the route is known. All

the destinations for which the route is broken of partially

know are not entered in the table.

Building a route from topology table

The routing table is based on the information contained in the

neighbor table and the topology table. Therefore, if any of this

table is changed, the routing table is re-calculated to update

the route information about each known destination in the



network. The table is re-calculated when a change in the

neighborhood is detected concerning a bi-directional link or

when a route to any destination is expired (because the

corresponding topology entry is expired). The re-calculation

of this routing table dies not generate of trigger any packets to

be transmitted, neither in the entire network, nor in the one-

hop neighborhood

The following proposed procedure may be executed to

calculate (or re-calculate) the routing table:

1. All the entries of routing table are removed.

2. The new entries of routing table are recorded in the table

stating with one hop neighbours (h=1) as destination nodes.

For each neighbour’s entry in the neighbour table, whose link

status is not un-directional, a new route entry is recorded in

the routing table where set to 1.

3. Then the new route entries for destination nodes h+1 hop

away are recorded in the routing table. The following

procedure is executed for each value of h, starting with h=1

and incrementing it by 1 each time. The execution will stop if

no new entry is recorded in iteration.

4. For each topology entry in topology table if its destination

address does not corresponds to destination address of any

route entry in the routing table and its last-hop address of a

route entry with distance equal to h, then a new route entry is

recorded in the routing table where: destination is set to

destination address is topology table; next –hop is set of the

route entry whose destination is equal to above-mentioned

last-hop address; and _distance is set to h+1. After calculating

the routing table, the topology table, entries which are not

used in calculating the routes may be removed, if there is a

need to save memory space. Otherwise, these entries may

provide multiple routes.

3.4: Performance analysis

3.4.1Route optimality

The main problem is to show that the introduction of a

multipoint relay set as a subset of the neighbor set does not

destroy the connectivity properties of the network. Let us

take the following model: we consider a network made up of a

set of nodes and a set interconnection graph. We define the

usual distance which gives the minimal number of hops

between node and node .We also define as the minimal

number of hops, providing that the intermediate relay nodes

are forwarders. We can notice that does not define a distance

when some nodes are non-forwarders because triangle

inequality could be not satisfied every time. In the following,

we consider a safe network: By definition of link validity and

since the HELLO messages are periodically retransmitted, the

neighbor sensing and the election of multipoint relay nodes

can be performed without any particular problem, except if

mobile nodes move faster than HELLO interval. In the

following we suppose that every node has a multipoint relay

set that covers its two hop neighbor set we do not need to

assume optimality of the multipoint relay set. The last

operation is topology information broadcast. If for any node

its multipoint relay set coincides with its neighbor set, them

the TC message broadcast will reach any node in a straight-

forward way. In this case the minimal path to a remote node

received via TC message would be an optimal path and the

routing tables will contain the appropriate information. Our

point is that this property remains valid when multipoint relay

sets are strict subset of neighbor sets. We of multipoint relays

of rank 1 as the multipoint relays of rank k+1, for k integer, as

the union of multipoint relay set of all nodes element of the

multipoint relay set of rank k. In other words each element Mk

of the multipoint relay set of rank k of a node X can be

reached via a path XM1… Mk where M1 is multipoint relay

of X, and Mi+1 is multipoint relay of Mi

Theorem 1 If for two nodes X and Y, df (X, Y) = k+1 for k

integer, then Y is at distance 1 from the multipoint relay set of

rank k of X.

Proof: By recursion.

The proposition is valid for k = o and k = 1, by definition of

the multipoint relay set. We suppose the proposition valid for

k, and let us assume a node Y such that dF (X, Y) = k+ 2.

Therefore there exists an optimal valid path XF….FkFk+1Y

where the F is are all forwarder nodes. We have dF (X, Fk+1)

=k+1 therefore Fk+1 is at distance 1 from the multipoint relay

set of rank k of k. Let Mk be the element of the multipoint

relay set of rank k of X such that d F (Mk’Fk+1) +1; therefore

dF(Mk, Y ) =2 and Y belongs to the two hop neighbor set of

Mk. Let Mk+1 be multipoint relay of Mk+1 belongs to the

multipoint relay set of rank k+1 the theorem is proved.

3.4.2 Broadcast performance

Theorem 2 for all pair of nodes X and Y, X generating and

transmitting a broadcast packet P, Y receives a copy of P.

Proof: By reversed recursion.

We suppose that transmissions are error free but are

subject to arbitrary finite delays. Let k be the closest distance

to Y from which a copy of packet P has been eventually (re)

transmitted. We shall prove that k= 1 Let F be the first

forwarder at distance k (k> 2) from Y, which has retransmitted

P. There exists a multipoint relay F’ of F which is at distance

k-1 of Y. To be convinced: we imagine a path of length k from

F to Y: F, F1, F2 …..Fk-, Y and we take for F’ the multipoint

relay for F which covers F2 Since F’ received a copy of a P

the first time from F ( the prior transmitters are necessarily

two –hops away from F’ ) therefore F’ will automatically

forward P: packet P will be retransmitted at distance k- 1 from

Y. The theorem is proved.

Note that if the transmission is prone to errors, then there is no

guarantee of correct packets reception by the intended

destination. But this is a common problem to all unreliable

communications networks which need upper layer recovery

procedure.



IV. RESULTS

4.1AODV-802-11 MODULE

4, 1.1AODV-802-11-delay channel type Channel/WirelessChannel

radio-

propagation

model

Propagation/TwoRayGround

Antenna type Antenna/OmniAntenna

Link layer type LL

Interface queue

type

Queue/DropTail/PriQueue

max packet in

ifq

200

network

interface type

Phy/WirelessPhy

MAC type Mac/802_11

number of mobilenodes

50

routing protocol AODV

X 500

Y 500

Table 4.1

4.1.2 PACKET DELAY:

The delay of a packet in a network is the time it takes the

packet to reach the destination after it leaves the source.

time Frequency

0 0

2 3190.5

4 2740.3

6 1835.6

8 1391.2

10 1131.1

4.1.3: ENERGY SPENT

AODV-802-11-energy

time Frequency

0 0

2 16.33

4 16.59

6 16.81

8 17.01

10 17.21

4.1.4: PACKET DELIVERY RATIO

AODV-802-11-pdr

time Frequency

0 0

2 0.1250

4 0.4136

6 0.4380

8 0.4534

10 0.4675

4.1.5 THROUGHPUT

The vertical axis shows the throughput, measured in

kilobytes per second, which should be maximized.

Received bytes

Throughput=

Time of simulation



AODV-802-11-throughput

time Frequency

0 0

2 25.06

4 37.41

6 38.04

8 38.53

10 38.83

4.1.6: ROUTING OVERHEAD

AODV-802-11-routing-overhead

time Frequency

0 0

2 30.20

4 10.27

6 8.99

8 6.64

10 5.27

4.2: AODV-802-15-4 MODULE

AODV-MAC-802-15-4

channel type Channel/WirelessChannel

radio-propagation model Propagation/TwoRayGround


Link layer type LL

Interface queue type


max packet in ifq

200

network interface type Phy/WirelessPhy

MAC type Mac/802_15_4

number of mobilenodes 50

routing protocol AODV

X 500

Y 500

4.2.1: DELAY

AODV-MAC-802-15-4-delay

time frequency

0 0

2 3066.5

4 2616.5

6 1711.5

8 1267.5

10 1007.5

4.2.2: ENERGY SPENT



AODV-MAC-802-15-4-energy

time frequency

0 0

2 14.16

4 14.42

6 14.64

8 14.84

10 15.04


AODV-MAC-802-15-4-pdr

time frequency

0 0

2 0.36

4 0.6486

6 0.673

8 0.6884

10 0.7025

4.2.4: THROUGHPUT

AODV-MAC-802-15-4-throughput

time frequency

0 0

2 62.67

4 75.02

6 75.65

8 76.14

10 76.44


AODV-MAC-802-15-4-routing-overhead

time frequency

0 0

2 26.04

4 6.11

6 4.82

8 2.48

10 1.11



4.3: NEW PROTOCOLE EEMRP (Energy Efficient

Mobile Routing Protocol) MODULE

Eemrp-802-15-4

channel type Channel/WirelessChannel

radio-propagation model Propagation/TwoRayGround


Link layer type LL

Interface queue type


Max packet in ifq

200

Network interface type Phy/WirelessPhy

MAC type Mac/802_15_4

Number of mobilenodes 50

Routing protocol EEMRP

X 500

Y 500

4.3.1: DELAY

Eemrp-802-15-4-delay

time frequency

0 0

2 0

4 10.69

6 12.97

8 12.02

10 12.56

4.3.2: ENERGY

Eemrp-802-15-4-energy

time frequency

0 0

2 3.62

4 12.77

6 13.04

8 13.21

10 13.48


Eemrp-802-15-4-pdr

time frequency

0 0

2 0

4 0.6778

6 0.8876

8 0.8907

10 0.9625

4.3.4: THROUGHPUT

Eemrp-802-15-4-throughput



time frequency

0 0

2 0

4 111.33

6 119.81

8 119.85

10 122.57


Eemrp-802-15-4-routing-overhead

4.4: COMPRISTION WITH IN ALL MODULE

4.4.1: AVERAGE DELAY

module 0

Sec

2 Sec 4 Sec 6 Sec 8 Sec 10 Sec

aodv-

802-11

0 3190.5 2740.3 1835.6 1391.2 1131.1

aodv-

mac-802-

15-4

0 3066.5 2616.5 1711.5 1267.5 1007.5

eemrp-

802-15-4

0 0 10.69 12.97 12.02 12.56

4.4.2: COMPRISION WITH ENERGY SPENT IN ALL

MODULE

module 0

Sec


aodv-802-

11

0 16.33 16.59 16.81 17.01 17.21

aodv-mac-

802-15-4

0 14.16 14.42 14.64 14.84 15.04

eemrp-

802-15-4

0 3.62 12.77 13.04 13.21 13.48

4.4.3: COMPRITION WITH PACKET DELIVERY

RATIO IN ALL MODULE

time frequency

0 0.1

2 0.1

4 0.1

6 0.1

8 0.1

10 0.1



module 0

Sec


aodv-

802-11

0 0.1250 0.4136 0.4380 0.4534 0.4675

aodv-

mac-802-

15-4

0 0.36 0.6486 0.673 0.6884 0.7025

eemrp-

802-15-4

0 0 0.6778 0.8876 0.8907 0.9625

4.4.4: COMPRISION WITH THROUGHPUT IN ALL

MODULES

module 0

Sec


aodv-

802-11

0 25.06 37.41 38.04 38.53 38.83

aodv-

mac-802-

15-4

0 62.67 75.02 75.65 76.14 76.44

eemrp-

802-15-4

0 0 111.33 119.85 119.85 122.57

4.4.5: COMPRITION WITH PACKET OVERHEAD IN

ALL MODULES

module 0

Sec

2 Sec 4 Sec 6

Sec

8

Sec

10

Sec

aodv-

802-11

0 30.20 10.27 8.99 6.64 5.27

aodv-

mac-

802-15-4

0 26.04 6.11 4.82 2.48 1.11

eemrp-

802-15-4

0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Finally EEMRP (Energy Efficient Mobile Routing Protocol)

is best for energy, throuput packet delivery ratio.

V. CONCLUSION

In this work, we introduce proposed energy efficient protocol

enhanced; energy efficient mobile routing protocol (EEMRP)

routing mechanism for WSN. Furthermore, this algorithm is

enhanced with the multipath feature to reduce congestion

situations in WSN. Finally, this autonomic routing mechanism

will come up with better data throughput rate and maximum

lifetime while minimizing packet loss and packet delay.

REFERENCES

[1]. S. Kim, S. Pakzad, D. Culler, J. Demmel, G. Fenves, S.

Glaser, and M. Turon. Health monitoring of civil

infrastructures using wireless sensor networks. In

international conference on Information processing in

sensor networks (IPSN), Cambridge, USA, 2007. ACM.

[2]. T. Ulrich. Wireless network monitors h2o: System saves

resources, increases yield in cabernet vineyard. Wines and

Vines Magazine, July 2008.

[3]. IEEE 802.15.4-2006 standard.

http://www.ieee802.org/15/pub/TG4.html, 2006.

[4]. Joseph Polastre, Jason Hill, and David Culler. Versatile

low power media access for wireless sensor networks. In

International conference on Embedded networked sensor

systems (Sensys), pages 95–107. ACM, Baltimore,MD,

USA 2004.

[5]. A. Bachir, M. Heusse, A. Duda, and K.K. Leung.

Preamble sampling MAC protocols with persistent

receivers in wireless sensor networks. IEEE Transactions

on Wireless Communications, 8(3):1091 –1095, March

2009.

[6]. Wei Ye, J.Heidemann, and D. Estrin. An energy-

efficientmac protocol forwireless sensor networks. In

INFOCOM, volume 3, pages 1567 – 1576. IEEE, 2002.

[7]. W. Ye and J. Heidemann. Ultra-low duty cycle MAC with

scheduled channel polling. In Conference on Embedded

Networked Sensor Systems (SenSys), pages 321–334,

USA, 2006.

[8]. F. Cuomo, E. Cipollone, and A. Abbagnale. Performance

analysis of IEEE 802.15.4 wireless sensor networks: An

insight into the topology formation process. Computer

Networks, 53(18):3057–3075, December 2009.

[9]. Anna Abbagnale, Emanuele Cipollone, and Francesca

Cuomo. A case study for evaluating IEEE 802.15.4

wireless sensor network formation with mobile sinks. In

International Conference on Communications (ICC),

Dresden, Germany, June 2009. IEEE.

[10]. Zigbee. http://www.zigbee.org/, 2005.



[11]. Meng-Shiuan Pan, Chia-Hung Tsai, and Yu-Chee

Tseng. The orphan problem in zigbee wireless networks.

IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 8(11):1573–

1584, November 2009.

[12]. N. Hadid, A. Guitton, and M. Misson. Exploiting a

meeting channel to interconnect 802.15.4-compliant

mobile entities: discovery and association phases. In

International Symposium on Computers and

Communications (ISCC), pages 94–99. IEEE, june 2010.

[13]. Andreas Willig, Niels Karowski, and Jan-Hinrich

Hauer. Passive discovery of IEEE 802.15.4-based body

sensor networks. Ad Hoc Networks, 8(7):742–754,

September 2010.

[14]. N. Karowski, A. C. Viana, and A. Wolisz.

Optimized asynchronous multi-channel neighbor

discovery. In INFOCOM, Shanghai, China, May 2011.

IEEE.

[15]. T.Winter, P. Thubert, A. Brandt, J.Hui, R.Kelsey, P.

Levis,K. Pister, R. Struik, JP.Vasseur, and R. Alexander.

RPL: IPv6 routing protocol for low-power and lossy

networks. Rfc 6550, 2012.

[16]. C. Chaudet, D. Dhoutaut, and I.G. Lassous.

Performance issues with IEEE 802.11 in ad hoc

networking. IEEE Communications Magazine, 43(7):110

– 116, july 2005.

[17]. IEEE 802.15WPANtask group 4b (tg4b).

http://www.ieee802.org/15/pub/TG4b.html, September

2004.

[18]. G. Anastasi, M. Conti, and M. Di Francesco. The

mac unreliability problem in IEEE 802.15.4 wireless

sensor networks. In International conference on

Modeling, analysis and simulation of wireless and mobile

systems (MSWiM), pages 196–203, Tenerife, Spain,

October 2009. ACM.

[19]. Jaejoon Cho and Sunshin An. An adaptive beacon

scheduling mechanism using power control in cluster-tree

wpans. Wireless Personal Communications, 50(2):143–

160, 2009.

[20]. R. Burda and C. Wietfeld. A distributed and

autonomous beacon scheduling algorithm for IEEE

802.15.4/ZigBee networks. In Internatonal Conference on

Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Systems (MASS), Pisa, Italy,

October 2007. IEEE.

[21]. P. Selvan Muthukumaran, R. de Paz, R. Špinar, and

D. Pesch. Meshmac: Enabling mesh networking over

IEEE802.15.4 through distributed beacon scheduling. In

International Conference on Ad Hoc Networks

(AdHocNets), Niagara Falls, Ontario, Canada, September

2009.

[22]. B.C. Villaverde, R. De Paz Alberola, S. Rea, and D.

Pesch. Experimental evaluation of beacon scheduling

mechanisms for multihop IEEE 802.15.4 wireless sensor

networks. In SENSORCOMM, pages 226–231. IARIA,

July 2010.

[23]. G. Chelius, A. Fraboulet, and E. Fleury. Worldsens:

development and prototyping tools for application

specific wireless sensors networks. In International

Conference on Information Processing in Sensor

Networks (IPSN), Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA,

2007. ACM.

[24]. Y. Chen and N. Nasser, "Energy-Balancing Multipath

Routing Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks," in The

Third International Conference on Quality of Service in

Heterogeneous Wired/Wireless Networks (QShine’06)

Waterloo, Ontario, Canada: ACM, 2006.

[25]. S. Balasubramaniam, D. Botvich, W. Donnelly, M.

Foghluh, and J. Strassner, "Biologically Inspired Self-

Governance and Self-Organisation for Autonomic

Networks," in IEEE, 2006.

[26]. .

[27]. .

[28]. .

[29]. ..

[30]. .

[31]. .

[32]. .

[33]. .

[34]. .

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

international journal of modern computer science … · international journal of modern computer...

Documents