Advertisement

Wireless Networks

, Volume 20, Issue 5, pp 871–887 | Cite as

A survivable routing protocol for two-layered LEO/MEO satellite networks

  • Yong LuEmail author
  • Youjian Zhao
  • Fuchun Sun
  • Hongbo Li
Article

Abstract

Due to the rapid development of space communication, satellite networks will be confronted with more complex space environment in future, which poses the important demand on the design of the survivable and efficient routing protocols. Among satellite networks, two-layered Low Earth Orbit (LEO)/Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) satellite networks (LMSNs) have become an attractive architecture for their better communication service than single-layered satellite networks. To determine the topological dynamics of LMSN, the satellite group and group manager (SGGM) method is a prevalent strategy. However, it can not precisely capture the topological dynamics of the LEO layer, which may result in the unreliability of data transmission. Besides, most existing routing protocols based on the SGGM method will collapse once any top satellite fails. To overcome both limitations, this paper proposes a new topology control strategy for LMSNs. The proposed strategy determines the snapshot in terms of the topological change of the LEO layer, which ensures the topological consistency of routing calculation. Moreover, a new survivable routing protocol (SRP) is presented for LMSNs by combining both centralized and distributed routing strategies. The SRP can provide strong survivability under the LEO or MEO satellite failure. Besides, it can also achieve the minimum delay routing provided the MEO layer can effectively work. The performance of SRP is also evaluated by simulation and analysis.

Keywords

Low Earth Orbit (LEO) Medium Earth Orbit (MEO) Satellite network Routing survivability 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by National Basic Research Program of China (973 Program) (Grant No: 2012CB821206), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No: 60903184, 61073167, 61004021), the National High Technology Development Program of China (Grant No: 2011AA010704), National science and technology support program of China (Grant No: 2011BAH15B08).

References

  1. 1.
    Werner, M. (1997). A dynamic routing concept for ATM-based satellite personal communication networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 15(8), 1636–1648.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Ekici, E., Akyildiz, I. F., & Bender, M. D. (2001). A distributed routing algorithm for datagram traffic in LEO satellite networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 9(2), 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang, K., Yi, K., Tian, B., & Wu, C. (2006). Packet routing algorithm for polar orbit LEO satellite constellation network. Science in China: Series F Information Sciences, 49(1), 103–127.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Korcak, O., Alagoz, F., & Jamalipour, A. (2007). Priority-based adaptive routing in NGEO satellite networks. International Journal of Communication Systems, 20(3), 313–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Akyildiz, I. F., Ekici, E., & Bender, M. D. (2002). MLSR: A novel routing algorithm for multi-layered satellite IP networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 10(3), 411–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chen, C., & Ekici, E. (2005). A routing protocol for hierarchical LEO/MEO satellite IP networks. ACM/Kluwer Wireless Networks Journal (WINET), 11(4), 507–521.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Papapetrou, E., Karapantazis, S., & Pavlidou, F. N. (2007). Distributed on-demand routing for LEO satellite systems. Computer Networks, 51(15), 4356–4376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wang, J., Li, L., & Zhou, M. (2009). Topological dynamics characterization for LEO satellite networks. Computer Networks, 51(1), 43–53.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Long, F., Xiong, N., Vasilakos, A. V., Yang, L. T., & Sun, F. (2010). A sustainable heuristic QoS routing algorithm for pervasive multi-layered satellite wireless networks. Journal of Wireless Networks, 16(6), 1657–1673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhou, Y., Sun, F., & Zhang, B. (2007). A novel QoS routing protocol for LEO and MEO satellite networks. International Journal of Satellite Communications and Networking, 25, 603–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lu, Y., Sun, F., & Zhao, Y. (2013). Virtual topology for LEO satellite networks based on Earth-fixed footprint mode. IEEE Communications Letters, 17(2), 357–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Werner, M., Delucchi, C., Vogel, H., Maral, G., & De Ridder, J. (1997). ATM-based routing in LEO/MEO satellite networks with intersatellite links. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 15, 69–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chang, H. S., Kim, B. W., & Lee, C. (1998). FSA-based link assignment and routing in low-Earth orbit satellite networks. IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology, 47(3), 1037–1048.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gounder, V. V., & Prakash, R., Abu-Amara, H. (1999). Routing in LEO-based satellite networks, In Proceedings of the wireless communications and systems workshop, Richardson, TX, pp. 2211–2216.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fischer, D., Basin, D., & Engel, T. (2008). Topology dynamics and routing for predictable mobile networks. In Proceedings of the ICNP 2008. Orlando: IEEE Communications Society, pp. 207–217.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Uzunalioglu, H., Akyildiz, I. F., & Bender, M. D. (2000). A routing algorithm for LEO satellite networks with dynamic connectivity. ACM–Baltzer Journal of Wireless Networks (WINET), 6(3), 181–190.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Uzunalioglu, H. (1998). Probabilistic routing protocol for low earth orbit satellite networks. In Proceedings of the ICC’98, Atlanta, GA, USA.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Uzunalioğlu, H., Akyildiz, I. F., Yesha, Y., & Yen, W. (1999). Footprint handover rerouting protocol for low Earth orbit satellite networks. ACM/Kluwer Wireless Networks Journal (WINET), 5(5), 327–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Henderson, T., & Katz, H. (2000). On distributed geographic based packet routing for LEO satellite networks. In Proceedings of IEEE GLOBECOM, San Francisco, USA, pp. 1119–1123.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kucukates, R., & Ersoy, C. (2008). Minimum flow maximum residual routing in LEO satellite networks using routing set. ACM/Kluwer Wireless Networks Journal (WINET), 14(4), 501–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ekici, E., Akyildiz, I. F., & Bender, M. D. (2002). A multicast routing algorithm for LEO satellite IP networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 10(2), 183–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rao, Y., & Wang, R. (2010). Agent-based load balancing routing for LEO satellite networks. Computer Networks, 54(17), 3187–3195.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zihe, G., Qing, G., & Zhenyu, N. (2011). Distributed routing algorithm with traffic prediction in LEO satellite networks. Journal of Information Technology, 10(2), 285–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cao, J., & Stefanovic, M. (2010). Cross entropy accelerated ant routing in satellite networks. In Proceedings of American control conference (ACC), pp. 5080–5087.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lee, J., & Kang, S. (2000). Satellite over satellite (SOS) network: A novel architecture for satellite network. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, Tel-Aviv, Israel (Vol. 1, pp. 315–321).Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ghedia, L., Smith, K., & Titzer, G. (1999). Satellite PCN-the ICO system. International Journal of Satellite Communications and Networking, 17, 273–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Omer, K., & Fatih, A. (2009). Virtual topology dynamics and handover mechanisms in Earth-fixed LEO satellite systems. Computer Networks, 53(9), 1497–1511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ferreira, J., & Galtier, J. (2005). Topological design, routing and hand-over in satellite networks. Handbook of wireless networks and mobile computing (pp. 473–507). London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mauger, F. R., & Rosenberg, C. (1997). QoS guarantees for multimedia services on a TDMA-based satellite network. IEEE Communications Magazine, 35, 56–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Svigelj, A., Mohorcic, M., Kandus, G., Kos, A., Pustisek, M., & Bester, J. (2004). Routing in ISL networks considering empirical IP traffic. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 22(2), 261–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and TechnologyTsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations