1 / 35

Milano, 4-5 Ottobre 2004 IS-MANET The Virtual Routing Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks ISTI – CNR

Milano, 4-5 Ottobre 2004 IS-MANET The Virtual Routing Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks ISTI – CNR. S. Chessa. Wireless Ad Hoc Networks. Autonomous system of mobile hosts connected by wireless links The nodes are autonomous and independent Battery powered Mobile

risa
Télécharger la présentation

Milano, 4-5 Ottobre 2004 IS-MANET The Virtual Routing Protocol for Ad Hoc Networks ISTI – CNR

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Milano, 4-5 Ottobre 2004IS-MANETThe Virtual Routing Protocol for Ad Hoc NetworksISTI – CNR S. Chessa

  2. Wireless Ad Hoc Networks • Autonomous system of mobile hosts connected by wireless links • The nodes are autonomous and independent • Battery powered • Mobile • Cooperate in a peer-to-peer fashion • No fixed network infrastructure • Pure distributed system • No centralized coordinators • Nodes communicate by exchanging packets via radio waves

  3. Wireless Ad Hoc Networks • Applications: • communication in remote or hostile environments • management of emergencies • disaster recovery • ad hoc commercial installations • sensor networks • Features: • Rapidly deployable • Easily configured • Robustness • Potential drawbacks • Distributed control • Neighbor knowledge • Mobility is a challenge

  4. Wireless Ad Hoc Networks • Wireless communications: • Transmission range of the nodes is limited • Obstacles may prevent direct communication between a pair of nodes • Point-to-point Network • Communication between non-adjacent nodes requires cooperation of other nodes

  5. Wireless Ad Hoc Networks

  6. Proactive Routing • Solution derived from wired networks (Proactive approach) • Table driven • Link state • Drawbacks: • Updates overhead, especially in presence of high mobility • Large routing tables • Low scalability

  7. On Demand (Reactive) protocols • No information about routes is maintained proactively • routes established only when needed (on-demand routing) • Route discovery process generally based on flooding: • A route request message (RREQ) is sent (flooded) to discover a path to the destination • Upon receiving the RREQ the destination sends a route reply message (RREP) back to the source

  8. Virtual Routing Protocol (VRP) The Virtual Routing Protocol (VRP): • Designed to reduce the overhead of route discovery based on flooding • Does not assume any geographical information of the nodes. • Hybrid routing algorithm • Exhibits features of both reactive and proactive protocols • Can be tuned to behave as a reactive or as a proactive • Three different priorities for messages

  9. Virtual Routing Protocol (VRP) • Units are arranged in a Logical Structure: • No relation with the physical position of the units • Units must proactively maintain routes to the units to which they are connected in the logical structure • Examples: • Ring of Rings • Hypercube • CCC • 3d-Torus • Node u which proactively maintains a route to unit v is a scoutfor v • Node v is a peer of u • Three protocols: • Route acquisition (Route Discovery) • Route maintenance • Scouts Update

  10. Virtual Routing Protocol (VRP) • A example of Logical Structure: The Ring of Rings (RoR)

  11. Virtual Routing Protocol (VRP) • Route Acquisition (Route Discovery) • Based mainly on unicast messages • High priority • Virtual path setup • Path on the logical structure from the source to the destination • Route setup • Translation of the virtual path into a real physical route • Route Maintenance • Used when a previously established route gets broken during communication • Scouts Update • Based on flooding • Low priority • Can be completely Reactive or partially proactive

  12. VRP – Route Acquisition • Virtual path setup • The source computes a virtual pathbetween itself and the destination • The virtual path is computed on the logical structure • The virtual path is computed recursively • The virtual path is a sequence of scouts

  13. u1 u3 u3 u0 u0 VRP – Route Acquisition • Route setup - Virtual path translation • Virtual path: u2 • RTRANS route from source to destination: u2 u1 v

  14. u2 u2 u1 u1  v v z z v u3 u3 u3 u0 u0 u0 VRP – Route Acquisition • Route setup - Virtual path translation • Destination cuts the loops of the collected route and return to the source a loop-free route z

  15. u3 u0 VRP – Route Acquisition • Route setup - Virtual path translation • Shortcut to the destination Transmission range u2 u1 v z

  16. v z u4 u1 u5 u3 u0 u0 VRP – Route Acquisition • Route setup - Virtual path translation • RTRANS detour u5 u2 u4 u1 z u3

  17. VRP – Route Acquisition • Route setup (cont.) • Route Request • Used if a certain number of virtual path translations failed • Based on flooding • Similar to the route request of the other reactive routing protocols

  18. u0 VRP – Route Acquisition • Route Acquisition • When translating a virtual path • Upstream unit detects the broken link • Upstream unit computes a detour to deliver the RTRANS to its destination (If possible) • Upstream unit warns the last scout through which the RTRANS has passed that the route archived in this unit is broken • When the last scout receives the warnning it invokes the scout update phase of the protocol • Broken Route • Detour • Broken link message to the last scout z u4 u1 u5 u3

  19. u0 VRP – Route Maintenance • Data communication • Upstream unit discovers the broken link • Upstream unit send a route error message to the source • Source establishes a new route to the destination if desired u3

  20. VRP – Scouts Update • Invoked when: • A scout receives a broken link message • During the route acquisition phase the scout does not have a valid physical route to the next scout • Completely Reactive • Scout updates the route just to the broken unit • Partily Proactive • Scout updates the route to all of its peered unit • Use multiple destinations flooding

  21. VRP – Scouts Update • Multiple Destinations flooding • Message has a special character in the destination field to identify that it is for multiple destinations • It is forwarded even by its destinations • Each unit forward the message just once • Destinations of a multiple destination flooding are always all peered units of the source • When a unit receives a multiple destination flooding: • If it has already received this message: • It drops the message • Else • It looks in the logical structure if it is a destination of the flooding • If it is a destination it sends a reply to the source of the flooding • It rebroadcast the message

  22. VRP – Scouts Update • If each unit has k peered units, each multiple destination flooding generates k replies • The use of multiple destination flooding allows the scout to maintain their routes more up-to-date • The use of multiple destination flooding reduces the number of floodings perfomed for scouts update (demonstrated through simulation) • Multiple destination floodings increases the number of flooding replies (unicast messages) and reduces the number of flooding in the network

  23. VRP – Simulation • Simulation Model • Simplified MAC layer • CSMA – Listen the medium before try to transmit • RTS/CTS – When a unit is transmitting, its neighbors and the neighbors of the destination remain quiet • Exponential Delay – If transmission is not possible because the medium is not empty • Roughest Approximation: the simulator does not consider collisions • Neighbors information – the MAC layer provides to the routing protocols information about the neighbors of the units • Out Buffer of 300 messages with LRU • Three routing protocols were implemented: • VRP • DSR (draft version 9) • ZRP with unicast and ZRP with multicast (draft version 4)

  24. VRP – Simulation • Units: 75 • Network field: 1000m x 1000m • Transmission Range: 250m • Ring of Rings: • 3 rings • 25 units per ring • 5 scouts • Units’ velocity: 0m/s to 20 m/s • Units’ pause time: 0s to 600s • Simultaneous CBR connections: 10 to 50 • Messages per second per CBR source: 2 • Duration of each CBR connection: 15s or 120s

  25. VRP – Simulation • VRP versus DSR: Delivery ratio as a function of the units' speed for 20 simultaneous CBR connections.

  26. VRP – Simulation • VRP versus DSR: Delivery ratio as a function of the units' speed for 40 simultaneous CBR connections.

  27. VRP – Simulation • VRP versus DSR: Delay to build a route as a function of the units‘ speed for 20 simultaneous CBR connections.

  28. VRP – Simulation • VRP versus DSR: Routing load as a function of the units' speed with 20 simultaneous CBR connections. • VRP without proactive scout setup

  29. VRP – Simulation • VRP versus DSR: Routing load as a function of the units' speed with 40 simultaneous CBR connections. • VRP without proactive scout setup

  30. VRP – Simulation • VRP versus DSR: Average size of the units' routing table.

  31. VRP – Simulation • VRP versus ZRP: Delivery ratio as a function of the units' speed • 20 simultaneous CBR connections of at most 15 seconds duration.

  32. VRP – Simulation • VRP(up) versus ZRP(right): Delay to build a route as a function of the units' speed

  33. VRP – Simulation • VRP versus ZRP: Routing load as a function of the units' speed • 20 simultaneous CBR connections.

  34. VRP – Conclusions • Delivery ratio: • Light traffic conditions: • VRP always above 95% • DSR about 70% • ZRP about 82% • Heavy traffic conditions: • VRP never below 75% • DSR about 50% • ZRP around 80% • Route Acquisition Delay: • VRP has a delay significantly higher than DSR and ZRP • Unit’s Routing Tables: • DSR and ZRP: O(N) (N  number of units in the system) • VRP: O(k) (k  number of scouts per unit – connectivity of the logical structure)

  35. VRP – Improvements • Scout Update over Received Messages • Shortcuts in Virtual Path Translation • Avoiding High Priority Flooding • Proactive Zone • Avoid route acquisition by immediately sending data during virtual path translation

More Related