Search icone
Search and publish your papers

Sensor protocols for information via negotiation: A data centric routing protocol for wireless sensor networks

Or download with : a doc exchange

About the author

Level
Expert

About the document

Published date
Language
documents in English
Format
pdf
Type
case study
Pages
6 pages
Level
Expert
Accessed
0 times
Validated by
Committee Oboolo.com
0 Comment
Rate this document
  1. Abstract
  2. Introduction
  3. Routing challenges in wsn's
  4. Motivation behind spin
  5. The solution: Sensor protocols for information via negotiation (spin)
    1. Spin philosophy
    2. Metaa data
    3. Spin messages
    4. Spin protocols
    5. Performance comparison of spin protocols
    6. Advantages
    7. Disadvantages
  6. Conclusion
  7. Reference

The emergence of Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) as one of the dominant technology trends in the coming decades has posed numerous challenges for researchers. These networks are likely to be comprised of hundreds, and potentially thousands of tiny sensor nodes, functioning autonomously, and in many cases, without access to renewable energy resources. While the set of challenges in sensor networks are diverse, we focus on fundamental networking challenges (routing) in sensor networks. Routing in WSN is very challenging due to the inherent characteristics that distinguish these networks from other wireless networks like mobile ad hoc networks or cellular networks. In this paper we present a routing algorithm used by WSN, Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation (SPIN). This algorithm is a multi hop flat routing protocol and is data centric. This protocol motivated the design of many other protocols which follow a similar concept. Advantages and performance issues of the algorithm is also highlighted. Keywords: Wireless Sensor Networks, Data centric Routing, Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation

[...] We refer to the descriptors used in SPIN negotiations as meta-data. In SPIN, nodes poll their resources before data transmission. Each sensor node has its own resource manager that keeps track of resource consumption; applications probe the manager before transmitting or processing data. This allows sensors to cut back on certain activities when energy is low, e.g., by being more prudent in forwarding third-party data. It also allows sensors to take resource tradeoffs into account when making decisions. For example, a SPIN node may decide to send a piece of data unconditionally, without any negotiation, if it believes that the associated costs of sending the data are less than the costs of negotiating for it. [...]


[...] Upon receiving an ADV packet from node node B checks to see whether it possesses all of the advertised data If not, node B sends an REQ message back to listing all of the data that it would like to acquire When node A receives the REQ packet, it retrieves the requested data and sends it back to node B as a DATA message Node in turn, sends ADV messages advertising the new data it received from node A to all of its neighbors It does not send an advertisement back to node because it knows that node A already has the data. These nodes then send advertisements of the new data to all of their neighbors, and the protocol continues. Figure The SPIN-PP Protocol Although this protocol has been designed for lossless networks with symmetric communication links, it can easily be adapted to work in lossy or mobile networks. [...]


[...] In this paper, we present SPIN (Sensor Protocols for Information via Negotiation), a family of negotiation-based information dissemination protocols, suitable for wireless sensor networks. SPIN is designed to disseminate individual sensor observations to all sensors in a network, treating all sensors as potential sink nodes. SPIN, thus, provides a way of replicating complete views of the environment throughout an entire network 4. MOTIVATION BEHIND SPIN The design of SPIN grew out of the analysis of the different strengths and limitations of conventional classic flooding protocols for disseminating data in a sensor network. [...]


[...] Overlap: Sensor nodes often cover overlapping geographic areas, and nodes often gather overlapping pieces of sensor data. Figure 2 illustrates what happens when two nodes and gather such overlapping data and then flood the data to their common neighbor A r q q C B s Figure 2 : The Overlap Problem Again, the algorithm wastes energy and bandwidth sending two copies of a piece of data to the same node. Overlap is a harder problem to solve than the implosion problem implosion is a function only of network topology, whereas overlap is a function of both topology and the mapping of observed data to sensor nodes. [...]


[...] Computation: Sensors have limited computing power and therefore may not be able to run sophisticated network protocols. Fault Tolerance: Some sensor nodes may fail or be blocked due to lack of power, physical damage, or Environmental interference. The failure of sensor nodes should not affect the overall task of the sensor network. Scalability: The number of sensor nodes deployed in the sensing area may be in the order of hundreds or thousands, or more. Any routing scheme must be able to work with this huge number of sensor nodes. [...]

Similar documents you may be interested in reading.

Integrated software system

 Science & technology   |  Computer science   |  Thesis   |  05/28/2009   |   .doc   |   79 pages

Recent documents in computer science category

Net neutrality in United States

 Science & technology   |  Computer science   |  Presentation   |  10/02/2018   |   .doc   |   3 pages

Reconstructing householder vectors from tall-skinny QR

 Science & technology   |  Computer science   |  Presentation   |  04/21/2017   |   .doc   |   4 pages