Wireless Networks

, Volume 16, Issue 2, pp 449–466 | Cite as

Hierarchical geographic multicast routing for wireless sensor networks

  • Dimitrios Koutsonikolas
  • Saumitra M. Das
  • Y. Charlie Hu
  • Ivan Stojmenovic
Article

Abstract

Wireless sensor networks comprise typically dense deployments of large networks of small wireless capable sensor devices. In such networks, multicast is a fundamental routing service for efficient data dissemination required for activities such as code updates, task assignment and targeted queries. In particular, efficient multicast for sensor networks is critical due to the limited energy availability in such networks. Multicast protocols that exploit location information available from GPS or localization algorithms are more efficient and robust than other stateful protocols as they avoid the difficulty of maintaining distributed state (multicast tree). Since localization is typically already required for sensing applications, this location information can simply be reused for optimizing multicast performance at no extra cost. Recently, two protocols were proposed to optimize two orthogonal aspects of location-based multicast protocols: GMR (Sanchez et al. GMR: Geographic multicast routing for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE SECON, 2006) improves the forwarding efficiency by exploiting the wireless multicast advantage but it suffers from scalability issues when dealing with large sensor networks. On the other hand, HRPM (Das et al. Distributed hashing for scalable multicast in wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE TPDS 47(4):445–487, 2007) reduces the encoding overhead by constructing a hierarchy at virtually no maintenance cost via the use of geographic hashing but it is energy-inefficient due to inefficacies in forwarding data packets. In this paper, we present HGMR (hierarchical geographic multicast routing), a new location-based multicast protocol that seamlessly incorporates the key design concepts of GMR and HRPM and optimizes them for wireless sensor networks by providing both forwarding efficiency (energy efficiency) as well as scalability to large networks. Our simulation studies show that: (i) In an ideal environment, HGMR incurs a number of transmissions either very close to or lower than GMR, and, at the same time, an encoding overhead very close to HRPM, as the group size or the network size increases. (ii) In a realistic environment, HGMR, like HRPM, achieves a Packet Delivery Ratio (PDR) that is close to perfect and much higher than GMR. Further, HGMR has the lowest packet delivery latency among the three protocols, while incurring much fewer packet transmissions than HRPM. (iii) HGMR is equally efficient with both uniform and non-uniform group member distributions.

Keywords

Wireless sensor networks Geographic routing Location-based multicast Scalability Energy 

References

  1. 1.
    Basagni, S., Chlamtac, I., & Syrotiuk, V. (2001). Location aware, dependable multicast for mobile ad hoc networks. Computer Networks, 36, 659–670.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chen, K., & Nahrstedt, K. (2002). Effective location-guided tree construction algorithms for small group multicast in MANET. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM, June 2002.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mauve, M., Fuessler, H., Widmer, J., & Lang, T. (2003). Position-based multicast routing for mobile ad-hoc networks, Tech. Rep. CS TR-03-004. University of Mannheim.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    USCG Navigation Conter GPS page, http://www.navcen.uscg.nil/gps/default.html. January 2000 [Online]. Available: http://www.navcen.uscg.nil/gps/default.html.
  5. 5.
    Royer, E. M., & Perkins, C. E. (1999). Multicast operation of the ad-hoc on-demand distance vector routing protocol. In Proceedings of the MobiCom, August 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jetcheva, J. G., & Johnson, D. B. (2001). Adaptive demand-driven multicast routing in multi-hop wireless ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of the ACM MobiHoc, October 2001.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lee, S.-J., Gerla, M., & Chiang, C.-C. (1999). On-demand multicast routing protocol. In Proceedings of the IEEE WCNC, September, 1999.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sanchez, J., Ruiz, P., Liu, X., & Stojmenovic, I. (2006). GMR: Geographic multicast routing for wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE SECON.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Das, S. M., Pucha, H., & Hu, Y. C. (2007). Distributed hashing for scalable multicast in wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE TPDS, 47(4), 445–487Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ye, F., Zhong, G., Lu, S., & Zhang, L. (2003). Peas: A robust energy conserving protocol for long-lived sensor networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE ICDCS.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schurgers, C., Tsiatsis, V., Ganeriwal, S., & Srivastava, M. B. (2002). Stem: Topology management for energy efficient sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 1(1).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Xu, Y., Heidemann, J., & Estrin, D. (2001). Geography-informed energy conservation for ad hoc routing. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom), July 2001.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chen, B., Jamieson, K., Balakrishnan, H., & Morris, R. (2001). Span: An energy-efficient coordination algorithm for topology maintenance in ad hoc wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 7th ACM International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom), July 2001.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lee, S.-J., Su, W., & Gerla, M. (2002). On-demand multicast routing protocol in multihop wireless mobile networks. Mobile Networks and Applications, 7(6), 441–453.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bose, P., Morin, P., Stojmenovic, I., & Urrutia, J. (1999). Routing with guaranteed delivery in ad hoc wireless networks. In Proceedings of the ACM DialM Workshop, August 1999.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Karp, B., & Kung, H. (2000). GPSR: Greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks. In Proceedings of the ACM MobiCom, August 2000.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kuhn, F., Wattenhofer, R., & Zollinger, A. (2003). Worst-case optimal and average-case efficient geometric ad-hoc routing. In Proceedings of the ACM MobiHoc, June 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Das, S. M., Pucha, H., & Hu, Y. C. (2005). Performance comparison of scalable location services for geographic ad hoc routing. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM, March 2005.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zeng, X., Bagrodia, R., & Gerla, M. (1998). Glomosim: A library for parallel simulation of large-scale wireless networks. In Proceedings of the PADS Workshop, May 1998.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Takahashi, H., & Matsuyama, A. (1980). An approximate solution for the steiner problem in graphs. Mathematica Japonica, 24, 573–577.MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boivie, R., Feldman, N., & Metz, C. (2000). Small group multicast: A new solution for multicasting on the internet. IEEE Internet Computing, 4(3), 75–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ji, L., & Corson, S. (2001). Differential destination multicast–A MANET multicast routing protocol for small groups. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM, April 2001.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mizumoto, A., Yamaguchi, H., & Taniguchi, K. (2004). Cost-conscious geographic multicast on MANET. In Proceedings of the IEEE SECON.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Transier, M., Fuessler, H., Widmer, J., Mauve, M., & Effelsberg, W. (2004). Scalable position-based multicast for mobile ad-hoc networks. In Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Broadband Wireless Multimedia: Algorithms, Architectures and Applications (BroadWim), October 2004.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ruiz, P. M., & Stojmenovic, I. (2006). Cost-efficient multicast routing in ad hoc and sensor networks. In T. Gonzalez (Ed.), Handbook on approximation algrorithms and metaheuristics. Chapman and Hall/CRC.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Stojmenovic, I. (2006). Localized network layer protocols in sensor networks based on optimizing cost over progress ratio. IEEE Network, 20(1).Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wu, S., & Candan, K. S. (2006). GMP: Distributed geographic multicast routing in wireless sensor networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE ICDCS.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wu, C., & Tay, Y. (1999). AMRIS: A multicast protocol for ad hoc wireless networks. In Proceedings of the MILCOM, November 1999.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Gui, C., & Mohapatra, P. (2003). Efficient overlay multicast for mobile ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE WCNC, March 2003.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gui, C., & Mohapatra, P. (2004). Scalable multicasting for mobile ad hoc networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE INFOCOM, March 2004.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Madruga, E., & Garcia-Luna-Aceves, J. (2001). Scalable multicasting: The core assisted mesh protocol. ACM/Baltzer Mobile Networks and Applications, Special Issue on Management of Mobility in Distributed Systems, 6(1).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dimitrios Koutsonikolas
    • 1
  • Saumitra M. Das
    • 1
  • Y. Charlie Hu
    • 1
  • Ivan Stojmenovic
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.School of ECEPurdue UniversityWest LafayetteUSA
  2. 2.Electronic, Electrical & Computer EngineeringThe University of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  3. 3.SITEUniversity of OttawaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations