WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS

UNIT 2
Geographic Routing Protocol
1. Initialization:

● Location Acquisition: Each sensor node obtains its own location information.

This can be achieved through GPS, localization algorithms using anchor nodes

with known positions, or a combination of both.

● Destination Knowledge: The source node needs to be aware of the

destination's location. This information might be pre-loaded, received from a

central node, or discovered through specific protocols.

2. Packet Forwarding:

● Greedy Approach: The source node initiates the routing process by examining

its neighbors' locations. It chooses the neighbor closest to the destination based

on a specific geographic forwarding function. Common functions include:

○ Nearest Neighbor: Selects the neighbor with the shortest physical distance

to the destination.

○ Angular forwarding: Chooses the neighbor whose direction aligns best

with the source-destination line.

● Data Packet Structure: The data packet typically includes the source and

destination locations along with the actual payload (data being sent). This allows

each node to make informed forwarding decisions.

● Next Hop Selection: The chosen neighbor becomes the next hop. The packet is

forwarded to this neighbor, and the process repeats. The next hop continues by

examining its own neighbors and selecting the one closest to the destination
 based on the same forwarding function.

3. Loop Prevention and Reliability:

● Geographic Forwarding Zone (GFZ): To prevent infinite loops, a GFZ can be

defined around the destination. Nodes within the GFZ might employ different

forwarding strategies or rely on alternative mechanisms to ensure the packet

reaches the destination.

● Data Redundancy (Optional): Depending on the application's criticality, data

packets can be replicated and forwarded through multiple neighbors. This

increases the likelihood of successful delivery despite potential node failures or

transmission errors.

4. Handling Challenges:

● Void Holes: Areas lacking sensor nodes can create regions where no neighbor

is closer to the destination (greedy forwarding fails). Here, gossiping protocols

come into play. Nodes periodically share location information with neighbors,

allowing for the discovery of alternate paths around the void hole.

● Localization Errors: Inaccurate location data can lead to suboptimal routing.

Techniques like data fusion from multiple sources or averaging location estimates

can help improve accuracy.

Gossiping vs. Flooding in Geographical Routing Protocols

Both gossiping and flooding are techniques used for data dissemination in geographical

routing protocols, but they differ in their approach and efficiency. Here's a breakdown:

Flooding

● Concept: In flooding, a node receiving data blindly forwards it to all its neighbors.

This process continues until the data reaches the destination or a pre-defined

hop limit is reached.

● Working:

○ A source node initiates by sending the data packet to all its neighbors.

○ Each neighbor receiving the packet for the first time repeats the process,

forwarding it to all their neighbors (except the sender to avoid loops).

 ○ This continues until the destination receives the packet or the hop limit is

reached.

● Advantages:

○ Guaranteed delivery (if the destination is within the network and hop limit).

○ Simple to implement.

● Disadvantages:

○ Resource wastage: Excessive packet forwarding consumes bandwidth

and battery power (critical in sensor networks).

○ Implosion: Nodes can receive redundant copies of the same packet from

multiple neighbors.

○ Broadcast storms: In large networks, flooding can lead to overwhelming

traffic.

Gossiping

● Concept: Gossiping uses a probabilistic approach. Nodes forward data packets

to a randomly chosen subset of their neighbors, with a certain probability.

● Working:

○ The source node initiates by sending the data packet to some of its

neighbors.

○ Each receiving node forwards the packet to a random selection of its

neighbors, again with a pre-defined probability.

○ This probabilistic forwarding continues until the data reaches the

destination or a certain time limit is reached.

● Advantages:

○ Resource conservation: Less bandwidth and power consumption

compared to flooding.

○ Reduced implosion: Lower chance of receiving redundant copies.

 ● Disadvantages:

○ Uncertain delivery: There's no guarantee that the data will reach all

intended nodes within the network.

○ Slower propagation: Information dissemination can be slower compared

to flooding.

Comparison Chart

Feature Flooding Gossiping

Approach Blind forwarding to all Probabilistic forwarding to some

neighbors neighbors

Delivery Guaranteed (within hop Unlikely to reach all nodes

Guarantee limit)

Resource Usage High (bandwidth, battery) Low (compared to flooding)

Implosion Risk High Lower

Broadcast Storms Likely in large networks Less common

Implementation Simple May require additional logic for

probability

Choosing Between Flooding and Gossiping

The choice between flooding and gossiping depends on your specific needs:

● For guaranteed delivery and fast dissemination in small networks, flooding

might be suitable.
 ● For resource-constrained environments like sensor networks, gossiping

offers a more efficient alternative with acceptable trade-offs in delivery

guarantees.

Many geographical routing protocols leverage a hybrid approach, using flooding for

initial route discovery and gossiping for updates or data dissemination within

established routes.

Gossiping

Flooding

Geographical energy-aware routing protocols (GEAR)

Designed for networks like wireless sensor networks (WSNs) and mobile ad-hoc

networks (MANETs) where nodes are resource-constrained and rely on batteries. These

protocols leverage two key aspects for efficient routing:

 1. Geographic Information: Nodes use their location data to make informed

decisions about forwarding packets. This helps them choose paths closer to the

destination, reducing the number of hops a packet takes.

2. Energy Awareness: The protocol considers the remaining energy of neighboring

nodes before forwarding a packet. This ensures nodes with higher energy levels

are prioritized, extending the network's lifetime.

Here's a breakdown of how GEAR typically works:

● Two-Phase Routing:

○ Inter-Region Routing: When a node needs to send data, it uses

geographic information and energy data of its neighbors to select the next

hop that's closer to the destination and has sufficient energy. This process

continues until the packet reaches the destination's region.

○ Intra-Region Dissemination: Once the packet reaches the destination's

region, a localized flooding algorithm or recursive geographic forwarding

might be used to deliver the data to the specific destination node within

the region. This avoids unnecessary flooding across the entire network.

Benefits of GEAR protocols:

● Energy Efficiency: By prioritizing nodes with higher energy and choosing

shorter paths, GEAR helps conserve energy and extend network lifetime.
 ● Scalability: Geographic routing inherently scales well as nodes can make

routing decisions based on their local information without requiring extensive

network-wide knowledge.

Data-Centric Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)

Unlike traditional routing protocols that focus on specific destinations, data-centric

routing prioritizes the data itself. Here are the key points:

● Focus on Data Attributes: Nodes advertise and request data based on its

characteristics (temperature, pressure, etc.) instead of specific node addresses.

● Interest Propagation: The sink initiates the process by broadcasting an

"interest" message specifying the desired data attributes.

● Gradient-Based Forwarding: Nodes receiving the interest message forward it if

they possess the data or can potentially reach a node that does. They store

gradients indicating the direction from which the interest arrived.

● Data Aggregation: As data travels back to the sink, intermediate nodes can

aggregate (combine) similar data to reduce redundancy and save energy.

● Reinforcement: Once a data source is found, the sink reinforces the path by

sending more frequent interest messages, optimizing data delivery.

Benefits of Data-Centric Routing:

● Reduced Redundancy: Only data matching the interest is forwarded, minimizing

unnecessary transmissions.

● Scalability: Efficiently handles dynamic network topologies and varying data

demands.
 ● Energy Efficiency: Aggregation reduces data volume, leading to lower energy

consumption.

Directed Diffusion

Core Idea: Data-Centric Communication

Unlike traditional routing where specific nodes are addressed, directed diffusion focuses

on the data itself. The network operates on a "publish-subscribe" model.

● Sink Initiates: The process starts at the sink node, which is the point where data

is collected.

● Interests Disseminated: The sink broadcasts an "interest," essentially a

description of the desired data. This interest includes attributes and values

specifying what type of data is needed (e.g., temperature > 80 degrees Celsius).

Building Reverse Paths: Gradients and Reinforcements

● Interests Propagate: Sensor nodes receiving the interest examine it. If a node

can potentially sense the data described, it does two things:

1. Gradient Creation: It creates a gradient, which is basically a record of the

interest and the direction it came from (towards the sink).

2. Reinforcement: It forwards the interest further into the network, possibly

amplifying it (increasing its importance) to encourage other nodes to

participate.

Data Flows Along the Gradient

● Data Generation: Sensor nodes that can directly sense the data required in the

interest will start generating it.

 ● Data Transmission: Using the established gradients, these nodes transmit the

data back towards the sink, following the path created by the interest.

Key Components of Directed Diffusion

● Interests: These act as queries, specifying the data requirements.

● Data Messages: These are the actual sensor readings or processed information

sent by sensor nodes.

● Gradients: These represent the path information guiding data flow towards the

sink.

● Reinforcements: These mechanisms strengthen the interest as it propagates,

encouraging participation from relevant nodes.

Benefits of Directed Diffusion in WSNs

● Energy Efficiency: Nodes only transmit data relevant to the interest, reducing

unnecessary transmissions and saving battery life.

● Scalability: The protocol can adapt to changing network conditions and data

requirements.

● In-Network Processing: Sensor nodes can perform basic processing on the

data before sending it, reducing overall traffic.

However, there are also challenges to consider:

● Complexity: Implementing directed diffusion requires more sophisticated

algorithms compared to simpler routing protocols.

● Overhead: Disseminating interests and managing gradients can create some

communication overhead.
SPIN in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)

SPIN (Sensor Protocols for Information Negotiation) is a data-centric protocol designed

for WSNs to address the crucial challenge of energy conservation. WSNs consist of

numerous sensor nodes with sensing, processing, and communication capabilities.

These nodes are often battery-powered and deployed in remote locations, making

efficient energy management essential for extending network lifetime.

Here's a breakdown of how SPIN works:

Core Concept: Metadata

● SPIN leverages the concept of metadata. Metadata is essentially high-level

information that describes the actual sensor data collected by a node.

● For instance, instead of transmitting the raw temperature reading, a node might

use metadata like "Temperature > 50°C".

Communication via Negotiation

 1. Data Advertisement (ADV): When a sensor node has new data to share, it

broadcasts an ADV message containing the metadata.

2. Data Request (REQ): Neighboring nodes receive the ADV message and

evaluate the metadata. If a node is interested in the actual data (because it

requires information beyond what the metadata offers), it sends a REQ message

back to the source node.

3. Data Transmission: Upon receiving a REQ, the source node transmits the

actual data payload to the requesting node.

Benefits of SPIN

● Reduced Redundancy: By using metadata negotiation, SPIN avoids

unnecessary data transmissions. Nodes only receive data they're specifically

interested in, preventing redundant broadcasts and saving energy.

● Targeted Data Delivery: SPIN enables targeted data dissemination, ensuring

information reaches only the nodes that need it. This is particularly beneficial in

scenarios where sensor data has varying degrees of importance across the

network.

Addressing Challenges

● Metadata Design: The effectiveness of SPIN hinges on well-designed metadata.

The metadata needs to be informative enough to guide data requests while

remaining concise to minimize overhead.

● Security Considerations: Since SPIN relies on broadcasting metadata, security

measures might be necessary to prevent unauthorized access to sensitive data.

Overall, SPIN offers a significant advantage in WSNs by promoting

energy-efficient data dissemination through negotiation and targeted data

delivery.

Rumor Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)

Rumor routing is a data-centric routing protocol specifically designed for WSNs. Unlike

traditional routing protocols that focus on sending data from a specific source to a

specific destination, rumor routing is concerned with events happening within the

network and queries related to those events.

Here's a breakdown of the key aspects of rumor routing:

Concept:

● The core idea is to establish paths towards ongoing events in the network. These

paths are formed proactively when an event occurs.

● Later, when a node has a query related to the specific event, the query can be

efficiently routed through the pre-established path.

Components:
 ● Agents: These are special long-lived packets that travel through the network.

When an event happens, a node creates an agent and injects it into the network.

● Event Table: Each node maintains a table containing information about local

events and the direction (neighbor) from which it heard about them.

How it Works:

1. Event Detection: When a sensor node detects an event (e.g., temperature rise),

it creates an agent containing details about the event.

2. Agent Propagation: The agent is then forwarded to random neighbors of the

detecting node. This random walk continues for a set number of hops or until a

certain timer expires.

3. Path Formation: Nodes that receive the agent for the first time add the event

and the direction they received it from (neighbor) to their event table. This

essentially creates a path towards the event source.

4. Query Initiation: A node interested in a specific event initiates a query

containing details about that event.

5. Query Routing: The query is forwarded through the network using a random

walk.

6. Event Response: When a node on the pre-established event path (learned from

the agent) receives the query, it can respond with the event details directly (if it

witnessed the event) or forward the query in the direction of the event source

(based on its event table).

Advantages:

● Energy Efficiency: Compared to flooding the entire network with queries, rumor

routing reduces energy consumption by establishing targeted paths only for

relevant events.
 ● Scalability: The protocol can adapt to network changes and node failures as

event paths are constantly updated through agent propagation.

Disadvantages:

● Overhead: Creating and propagating agents can introduce some initial overhead

on the network.

● Delivery Reliability: There's no guarantee that a query will always reach the

event source, especially for sparsely populated areas or highly mobile nodes.

The graph compares the efficiency of rumor routing against query flooding in a Wireless

Sensor Network (WSN). Here's the gist:

● X-axis: Shows the range or "spread" of rumor routing (likely number of hops

traveled by agents).

● Y-axis: Tracks two things:

○ Total transmissions: This is how many times messages (queries or agent

info) are sent across the network.

 ○ Number of queries: This indicates how many times nodes ask for

information about specific events.

Key takeaway: Rumor routing uses fewer transmissions than flooding, especially at a

low range. However, flooding guarantees queries reach all relevant nodes, while rumor

routing's success depends on its range setting. A higher range in rumor routing

increases transmissions but may still be less than flooding.

Overall, the graph suggests rumor routing offers a good balance between saving energy

(fewer transmissions) and finding the information a node needs (compared to flooding).

Gradient Routing:

Concept:

Gradient routing is a routing protocol designed for WSNs, particularly useful for

convergecast scenarios where data from multiple sensors needs to be delivered to a

single sink node. It works by assigning a scalar value, called a "height," to each sensor

node. These heights create a metaphorical "elevation" in the network, with values

increasing as you move away from the sink.

Height Calculation:
The height of a node is calculated using a cost function. This function can consider

various factors like:

● Hop count: Simplest approach, assigns height based on the number of hops from

the sink.

● Energy consumption: Height reflects the energy spent reaching the sink.

● Residual node energy: Prioritizes nodes with more remaining energy.

● Combinations: Combines factors for a more nuanced height assignment.

Forwarding Process:

With heights assigned, routing becomes straightforward. Each node forwards data to its

neighbor with the lowest height (think "downhill"). This ensures packets travel towards

the sink with the highest height.

Benefits:

● Scalability: Gradient routing adapts well to dynamic network changes as nodes

can recalculate their heights and neighbors can update their forwarding

decisions.

● Self-healing: Network disruptions like node failures are automatically handled by

the distributed nature of height calculation and neighbor selection.

● Simplicity: The core concept is easy to understand and implement, making it

attractive for resource-constrained sensor nodes.

Example:

Imagine a WSN with a central sink (height = 0). Nodes further away are assigned

progressively higher values based on the chosen cost function. When a sensor (height
= 3) needs to send data, it forwards it to its neighbor with the lowest height (e.g., height

= 2). This process continues until the data reaches the sink.

COUGAR

Database Approach:

● Instead of traditional routing protocols where each node needs to know the path

to the sink (destination), COUGAR treats the sensor network as a distributed

database.

● Users interact with the network using declarative queries, specifying the data

they need, rather than how to get it.

● The network handles the query execution plan, including identifying relevant

sensors, processing data, and delivering results.

Benefits:

● User-friendliness: Users don't need to worry about network specifics,

simplifying application development.

● Flexibility: Declarative queries allow for complex data retrieval without

reprogramming the network for each query.

Drawbacks:
 ● Overhead: An additional query layer introduces overhead in terms of energy

consumption and storage on sensor nodes.

● Synchronization: Network-wide data computations might require waiting for all

data before transmission, impacting efficiency.

● Leader Maintenance: Dynamically maintaining leader nodes for query execution

adds complexity and requires addressing potential failures.

ACQUIRE

ACQUIRE (Active Query forwarding in sensor networks) is a data-centric routing

protocol that focuses on efficient querying and data retrieval

Core Function:

● ACQUIRE utilizes a negotiation process between sensor nodes to establish a

data delivery path from source (sensor with relevant data) to the sink

(destination) based on the user's query.

Process:

1. Query Initiation: The sink broadcasts a query specifying the desired data type

(e.g., temperature, humidity).

2. Negotiation: Sensor nodes that possess the requested data or are capable of

acquiring it advertise their capabilities to neighboring nodes. This advertisement

includes the data type, cost (energy required for transmission), and reliability of

the path.

3. Path Establishment: Nodes negotiate with their neighbors, evaluating factors like

cost, reliability, and potential for data aggregation (combining data from multiple

sensors) to form an efficient path towards the sink.

 4. Data Transmission: Once a path is established, data is forwarded along the

chosen route to the sink.

Strengths of ACQUIRE:

● Energy Efficiency: The negotiation process helps identify energy-efficient paths,

extending network lifetime.

● Scalability: ACQUIRE adapts well to network size and varying data demands.

● Data Aggregation: By enabling aggregation at intermediate nodes, ACQUIRE

reduces data redundancy and transmission overhead.

Limitations:

● Overhead: Negotiation introduces some communication overhead, impacting

energy consumption.

● Latency: Establishing paths through negotiation might add a slight delay to data

delivery.

● Complexity: Compared to simpler protocols, ACQUIRE involves more complex

routing decisions at sensor nodes.

Sure, here is a table comparing COUGAR and ACQUIRE routing protocols in

WSNs:

Feature COUGAR ACQUIRE

Approach Database-centric Negotiation-based

User Interaction Declarative queries None (implicit through

query)
 Routing Network as distributed Path negotiation between
Strategy database nodes

Data Retrieval Complex queries supported Efficient data retrieval

based on negotiation

Overhead Higher (query layer, Lower (limited to

synchronization) negotiation)

Scalability Good Good

Data Not explicitly addressed Can be achieved during

Aggregation path negotiation

Leader Required for query Not required

Maintenance execution

Suitability Complex data retrieval, Energy-efficient data

user-friendliness retrieval, scalability

LEACH Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)

LEACH, which stands for Low-Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy, is a routing

protocol specifically designed for WSNs to improve their lifetime by optimizing energy

consumption. Here's a detailed explanation of LEACH:

Goal:

LEACH aims to distribute the energy load of data transmission uniformly across the

sensor nodes in the network. This is achieved by creating clusters and assigning

specific roles to nodes within those clusters.

Network Hierarchy:

LEACH introduces a hierarchical structure with three types of nodes:

● Base Station (Sink): This is a central point that collects data from the sensor

nodes.

● Cluster Head (CH): These are sensor nodes elected periodically to collect data

from other sensor nodes within their assigned cluster and transmit it to the base

station after aggregation or compression (to reduce data size).

● Cluster Member: These are regular sensor nodes that sense data and transmit it

to their designated cluster head.

Operation:

LEACH operates in rounds, with each round consisting of two phases:

1. Set-up Phase:

○ Each sensor node decides probabilistically whether to become a cluster

head in the current round. This decision is based on a threshold value that

considers the optimal number of cluster heads and the node's residual

energy.

○ Nodes that become cluster heads advertise themselves to other nodes in

the network.

○ Regular sensor nodes join the cluster of the closest cluster head based on

a received signal strength indicator (RSSI).

2. Steady-State Phase:
 ○ Cluster members transmit their sensed data to their assigned cluster

head.

○ Cluster heads aggregate or compress the data to reduce redundancy and

then transmit it to the base station.

Benefits:

● Reduced Energy Consumption: By having cluster heads handle data aggregation

and reducing transmission distances for regular nodes, LEACH significantly

reduces overall energy usage.

● Scalability: LEACH can function effectively in WSNs with varying sizes.

● Load Balancing: The probabilistic election of cluster heads helps distribute the

energy burden more evenly across the network.

Limitations:

● Static Cluster Formation: Clusters remain fixed for a certain period, which might

not be ideal for scenarios with mobile nodes.

● Single Base Station: LEACH is primarily designed for networks with a single base

station.

● Overhead: The process of cluster formation and advertisement can introduce

some communication overhead.

Further Developments:

LEACH has served as a foundation for many improved routing protocols in WSNs.

These protocols address limitations like static clusters and single-hop communication by

introducing concepts like dynamic cluster formation and multi-hop routing.

PEGASIS Routing in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)

PEGASIS, which stands for Power-Efficient Gathering in Sensor Information Systems, is

another hierarchical routing protocol designed for WSNs. Similar to LEACH, it focuses

on extending network lifetime by optimizing energy consumption during data

transmission. Here's a breakdown of PEGASIS:

Goal:

PEGASIS aims to create a single chain of sensor nodes where data from each node

travels along the chain towards a designated head node responsible for transmitting it to

the base station.

Network Hierarchy:

● Base Station (Sink): This is a central point that collects data from the sensor

nodes.

● Chain Leader: This is a single sensor node elected at the end of the chain to

transmit data to the base station after possible aggregation or compression.

Operation:
PEGASIS employs a greedy algorithm to form a chain structure. Here's a simplified

explanation:

1. Each node calculates a probability of becoming the chain leader based on its

distance to the furthest node in the network. Nodes closer to the periphery have

a higher chance of becoming the leader.

2. Nodes communicate with their neighbors, and each node chooses the neighbor

that is closest to the chain being formed (greedy selection).

3. This process continues until all nodes are connected in a single chain, with the

furthest node becoming the chain leader.

Benefits:

● Reduced Transmission Distance: Compared to individual transmissions to the

base station, data travels shorter distances along the chain, leading to lower

energy consumption.

● Scalability: PEGASIS can adapt to WSNs of varying sizes.

● Simple Structure: The chain structure is easier to manage compared to

complex clustering hierarchies.

Limitations:

● Single Chain: A single long chain might not be optimal for all network

deployments, especially for large and unevenly distributed sensor nodes. Nodes

far from the leader experience higher energy consumption.

● Static Chain: Chains are typically reformed periodically, but they might not adapt

well to dynamic network changes.

 ● Increased Load on Chain Leader: The chain leader handles all data

transmissions to the base station, leading to a higher energy burden on this

node.

Comparison with LEACH:

● Structure: PEGASIS uses a chain structure, while LEACH uses clusters with

cluster heads.

● Chain Formation: PEGASIS employs a greedy algorithm, while LEACH uses

probabilistic election for cluster heads.

● Data Aggregation: Both protocols can perform data aggregation at cluster

heads or the chain leader to reduce data size before transmission.

Overall, PEGASIS offers a simpler and more scalable approach to routing in

WSNs compared to LEACH. However, the single chain structure can lead to

uneven energy consumption across nodes.

There are also several variations of PEGASIS that address limitations like the single

chain by introducing concepts like multi-hop communication or chain breaks for data

aggregation at intermediate nodes.

LEACH vs. PEGASIS Routing in WSNs

 Feature LEACH PEGASIS

Network Cluster-based (cluster heads Chain-based (single chain with

Hierarchy & members) leader)

Cluster Probabilistic election based Greedy algorithm based on

Formation on threshold distance

Data Performed by cluster heads Performed by chain leader

Aggregation (optional)

Data Cluster heads transmit to Data travels along chain to

Transmission base station leader, then to base station

Scalability Works well for varying Adapts to WSNs of varying

network sizes sizes

Energy Reduces overall energy Lower transmission distances,

Consumption usage but imbalanced within chain

Complexity More complex with cluster Simpler chain structure

management

Suitability for Less suitable for dynamic Can be adapted with chain
Mobility node movement breaks

Single Base Primarily designed for single Can be adapted to multi-hop

Station base station networks

Overhead Cluster formation and Lower overhead compared to

advertisement add overhead LEACH
Additional Notes:

● LEACH offers better load balancing compared to PEGASIS due to distributed

cluster heads.

● PEGASIS might be more efficient for very large networks due to its simpler

structure.

● Both protocols have been foundational for further advancements in WSN routing

protocols.