Advertisement

Morelia Test: Improving the Efficiency of the Gabriel Test and Face Routing in Ad-Hoc Networks

  • Paul Boone
  • Edgar Chavez
  • Lev Gleitzky
  • Evangelos Kranakis
  • Jaroslav Opatrny
  • Gelasio Salazar
  • Jorge Urrutia
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3104)

Abstract

An important technique for discovering routes between two nodes in an ad-hoc network involves applying the face routing algorithm on a planar spanner of the network. Face routing guarantees message delivery in networks that contains large holes, where greedy algorithms fail. Existing techniques for constructing a suitable planar subgraph involve local tests that eliminate crossings between existing links by deleting some links. They do not test whether the deleted links actually create some crossings and some of the links are deleted needlessly. As a result, some of the routes found in face routing will have an unnecessarily large number of hops from source to destination. We consider a new local test for preprocessing a wireless network that produces a planar subgraph. The test is relatively simple, requires low overhead and does not eliminate existing links unless it is needed to eliminate a crossing, thus reducing overhead associated with multiple hops.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Barriere, L., Fraignaud, P., Narayanan, L., Opatrny, J.: Robust position-based routing in wireless ad hoc networks with unstable transmission ranges. In: The Proceedings of the 5th International Workshop on Discrete Algorithms and Methods for Mobile Computing and Communications (DIALM), pp. 19–27 (2001)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bose, P., Morin, P., Stojmenovic, I., Urrutia, J.: Routing with guaranteed delivery in ad hoc wireless networks. In: The Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Discrete Algorithms and Methods for Mobile Computing and Communications (DIALM), pp. 48–55 (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Broch, J., Maltz, D., Johnson, D., Hu, Y.-C., Jetcheva, J.: A performance comparison of multi-hop wireless ad hoc network routing protocols. Mobile Computing and Networking, 85–97 (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Datta, S., Stojmenovic, I., Wu, J.: Internal node and shortcut based routing with guaranteed delivery in wireless networks. In: Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing and Systems Workshops; Cluster Computing, pp. 461–466 (2001)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gabriel, K., Sokal, R.: A new statistical approach to geographic variation analysis. Systematic Zoology 18, 259–278 (1969)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gao, J., Guibas, L., Hershberger, J., Zhang, L., Zhu, A.: Geometric Spanner for Routing in Mobile Networks. In: Proceedings of the 2nd ACM International Symposium on Mobile Ad hoc Networking and Computing, pp. 45–55 (2001)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kranakis, E., Singh, H., Urrutia, J.: Compass Routing on Geometric Networks. In: Proceedings of 11th Canadian Conference on Computational Geometry, Vancouver, August 1999, pp. 51–54 (1999)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kuhn, F., Wattenhofer, R., Zollinger, A.: Asymptotically Optimal Geometric Mobile Ad-Hoc Routing. In: Proc. of the 6th International Workshop on Discrete Algorithms and Methods for Mobile Computing and Communications (DIALM), pp. 24–33 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Perkins, C.E. (ed.): Ad Hoc Networking. Addison Wesley, Reading (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Toussaint, G.: The relative neighbourhood graph of a finite planar set. Pattern Recognition 12(4), 261–268 (1980)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul Boone
    • 1
  • Edgar Chavez
    • 2
  • Lev Gleitzky
    • 3
  • Evangelos Kranakis
    • 1
  • Jaroslav Opatrny
    • 4
  • Gelasio Salazar
    • 3
  • Jorge Urrutia
    • 5
  1. 1.School of Computer ScienceCarleton UniversityOttawa
  2. 2.Escuela de Ciencias F’ısico-Matemáticas de la Universidad Michoacana de San Nicolás de HidalgoMéxico
  3. 3.IICO-UASLPMéxico
  4. 4.Department of Computer ScienceConcordia UniversityMontréal
  5. 5.Instituto de Matemáticas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, D.F.México City

Personalised recommendations