Networking Laboratory 1/27

Sungkyunkwan University
Copyright 2000-2011 Networking Laboratory
Residual Time Aware Forwarding for Randomly
Duty-Cycled Wireless Sensor Networks

Long Cheng, Canfeng Chen, Jian Ma, Lei Shu, and Laurence T. Yang

IEEE Conference on Computational Science and Engineering 2009
2011/11/15


Nguyen Phan Khanh Ha khanhha318@gmail.com

Networking Laboratory 2/23
Presentation Outline
Introduction
Related Work
Overview of the scheme
Residual Time Aware routing metric
Residual Time Aware Forwarding strategy
Discussions
Performance Evaluation
Conclusion
Networking Laboratory 3/23
Introduction
Data delivery is a major function of sensor network
applications
To save the energy, low duty-cycle WSNs are designed and
deployed
In randomly duty-cycle WSNs, sensors turn on and off in a random fashion
independent of each others
The authors propose a new routing metric as well as a
packet forwarding strategy for geographic routing in
randomly duty-cycled WSNs
The objective is to increase the delivery ratio and average advance
per hop, and reduce the delivery latency introduced by the duty-
cycling operation
Networking Laboratory 4/23
Related Work
Geographic routing is greedy forwarding data packets to
the neighbor geographically closest to the destination
Priori forwarding method:
In [1], [2], the next-hop forwarder is selected as a priori by the
forwarding node
Each node sends periodic control messages (beacons) including its
information
Each node maintains neighbor tables which store information
(location, link quality) of all its neighbors
Posteriori forwarding method (on-demand contention-based forwarding):
In [3], [4], the next-hop forwarder is chosen based on the contention
among neighbors
Neither topological knowledge or routing table are needed at each
node
The contention process is achieved by calculating a routing metric to
assign different back-off time at each neighbor

Networking Laboratory 5/23
Related Work
In [3], the authors propose a posteriori forwarding method,
called BOSS
Data packet is sent first rather than control messages
Only neighbors who successfully receive Data packet and provide positive
advance contend to be the next forwarder
Advance refers to the decreased distance between the neighbor to the
destination comparing with the forwarding node
Each contender starts a timer whose value depends on a metric
When timer expires, it sends a Response message to the forwarding node
The forwarding node broadcasts a Selection message to announce the
contention result and the new selected forwarding node starts broadcasting
Data packet
f
a
b
c
S
d Response
g
h
D
data
Selection
data
In this paper, the authors apply this
packet delivery scheme to randomly
low-duty-cycle WSNs
Networking Laboratory 6/23
Assumptions
Each sensor dynamically turns on and off its radio
independent of other sensors
The sleep duration t
s
is uniformly distributed within [M
s
V
s
, M
s
+V
s
]
The wake duration t
a
is uniformly distributed within [M
a
V
a
, M
a
+V
a
]
M and V are the mean value and the variance respectively
Each node only knows its current wake/sleep schedule, e.g.,
the residual time when in awake state
Residual time T
r
refers to the remaining time of a node keeping awake state
in its schedule
Each node can send and receive when it is in awake state
M
s

V
s
M
a
V
a

Duty
cycle
4 (s) 2 (s) 1(s)
0.5
(s)
20 %
t
a
e [0.5,1.5]; t
s
e [2,6]
Networking Laboratory 7/23
Motivation
Existing routing metrics for geographic routing, e.g.
maximum-advance are not suitable for randomly duty-
cycled WSNs
Among neighbors of forwarding node S, A wins the contention and become
the next-hop forwarder of node S
A broadcasts Data packet to its neighbors
A turns off the radio before receiving response message from its best next-
hop forwarder candidate C because of its limited residual time -> The three-
way handshake transmission fails -> A has to retransmit Data packet in the
next awake state
B should take the forwarding responsibility since it has longer residual time
Networking Laboratory 8/23
Overview of the scheme
An appropriate routing metric is needed in the contention
phase to help the forwarding node make a foresighted next
hop forwarder selection in duty-cycled networks
The authors propose a residual time aware (RTA) routing metric
RTA metric assigns the priority for each contender based on an overall
consideration including the advance distance and the residual time
of both the forwarding node and the contender
A RTA forwarding strategy is presented using the RTA metric for
data forwarding in duty-cycled networks
A
B
C
S D
Forwarding node Destination
Dist(S,D)
Networking Laboratory 9/23
Residual Time Aware Routing Metric
Notation
T
r
(i)
: The current residual time of node i keeping in the
awake state
T
max

: A predefined value, the upper bound for setting the

maximum value of contention timer of a contender
T
max
(j)
: The maximum value of node js contention timer
To avoid the three way handshake transmission fails, the Response
message should be replied before the forwarding node turns off its
radio
{ }
) ( '
max
) (
max
, min
i
r
j
T T T =
Networking Laboratory 10/23
Residual Time Aware Routing Metric
Priority Assignment (1/2)
For each contender j, the contention timers value of j, T
set
(j)


ADV(i,j): The advance provided by node j when j forwards data sent from
forwarding node i, ADV(i,j) = Dist(i,dest) Dist(j,dest)
R: The transmission range of a node
T
max
(j)
: The maximum value of node js contention timer
: the modification coefficient by taking the residual time of node j into
consideration

( ) t , 0
) , (
1
) (
max
) (
random T
R
j i ADV
T
j j
set
+
(

=
T
set
(j)
< T
set
(k)
: contender
j is selected as the next
hop forwarder of node i

i
Contender k
Contender j
Destination
Dist(i,dest)
Networking Laboratory 11/23
Residual Time Aware Routing Metric
Priority Assignment (2/2)
: the modification coefficient by taking the residual time of node j into
consideration

: the roughly estimated contention time needed by
contender j
T
max

: the upper bound for setting the maximum value of contention
timer (In advance for node js subsequent forwarding process)

The contender which provides more advance and has longer
residual time is assigned higher priority (lower value of T
set
)
( ) t , 0
) , (
1
) (
max
) (
random T
R
j i ADV
T
j j
set
+
(

+ |
.
|

\
|

= 1 ,
) , (
1
min
'
max
) (
max
) (

T T
R
j i ADV
T
j
j
r

) (
max
) , (
1
j
T
R
j i ADV
|
.
|

\
|

i
Contender k
Contender j
Destination
l
Networking Laboratory 12/23
Residual Time Aware Forwarding
A forwarding node i
Broadcast Data packet and waits in a maximum time for the
Response messages
If not receive Response message, rebroadcast Data packet up to K
1

times
If receive the first Response message, broadcast Selection message
containing the ID of selected contender and wait for the implicit ACK
If fail to receive ACK, rebroadcast Selection message up to K
2
times
If overhear ACK, go back to monitoring state and wait to receive
other Data packets
A neighbor j of node i
Once receiving a Data packet, start its contention timer T
set
(j)

When the timer T
set
(j)
expires, it sends a Response message to the
forwarding node i, waits for the Selection message and continues forwarding
data
The Selection message will suppress other neighbors contention

{ }
) ( '
max
, min
i
r
T T T =
Networking Laboratory 13/23
Residual Time Aware Forwarding
Example
data
T
r
(i)
j
m
l
i
k
D
T
set
(j)
T
set
(l)
T
set
(k)
Response
Selection
data
Data
Response message
Selection message
T
r
(j)
T
r
(k)
T
r
(l)
Networking Laboratory 14/23
Discussion (1/3)
The Response message from the best neighbor (the
neighbor with the smallest contention time T
set
) can be lost
The forwarding node i selects the neighbor which its Response
message reaching node i earliest as the next-hop forwarder
RTAF strategy cannot guarantee selecting the best neighbor in
terms of RTA routing metric


Data
T
r
(i)
j
i
k
D
T
set
(j)
T
set
(k)
Response message
Selection message
Networking Laboratory 15/23
Discussion (2/3)
Forwarding node i has to rebroadcast Selection message in
case:
The transmission of previous Selection message succeeds but the
forwarding node i fails in receiving the implicit ACK from the next-hop
forwarder
Data packet is broadcasted by node is next hop forwarder servers as
an implicit ACK
j
i
k
D
Data
Data broadcasted
by node j (Implicit ACK)
Selection
(Node j)
...
...
...


wake wake
sleep sleep
sleep sleep
wake
Response message
Data packet
Selection message
Networking Laboratory 16/23
Discussion (3/3)
Forwarding node i has to rebroadcast Selection message in
case:
The transmission of previous Selection message failed

Residual time
Residual time is smaller
sleep
sleep
sleep
sleep
wake
wake
wake
j
i
k
D
Response message
Data packet
Selection message


Selection node j
Selection node j
Networking Laboratory 17/23
Performance Evaluation
Simulation setup
Using NS-2 simulator
Comparing the result with Maximum-advance forwarding (MAF)
scheme
Using the packet delivery scheme like RTAF but using maximum-
advance distance as routing metric
400 sensors are uniformly placed in a 200mx200m field
The upper bound of the contention timer are T

max
= 0.5s and 1s
The average wake/sleep schedule period is set 5s

The sleep duration of each sensor:
t
s
e [2.25,6.75]
The active duration of each sensor:
t
a
e [0.25,0.75]
Networking Laboratory 18/23
Performance Evaluation
Evaluation metrics
Advance per hop:
The ratio of the sum of one-hop advances to the number of hops
End-to-end hops:
The number of required hops for an end to end transmission
End-to-end delivery delay:
The time for transmitting a data packet from a source to the sink
Duty-cycling Introduced delay:
The delayed time caused by the duty-cycling operation for an end-
to-end transmission
Duty-cycling Introduced delay ratio:
Data delivery ratio
Delay Delivery end to End
Delay Introduced cycling Duty

Networking Laboratory 19/23

Performance Evaluation
Impact of Duty-cycle
RTAF improves the end-to-end delay compared with MAF
The duty-cycling introduced delay ratio of RATF decreases
more rapidly when the duty-cycle increases
At lower duty cycles, RATF has the higher delivery ratio
than MAF
Networking Laboratory 20/23
Performance Evaluation
Impact of node density
Node duty cycle is 15%, T

max
= 0.5 s
RATF reduces the performance degradation caused by the
duty-cycle operation such as retransmission, delay
introduced by duty-cycling

Networking Laboratory 21/23
Conclusion
A new residual time aware routing metric for randomly duty-
cycled WSNs which is more responsive to the dynamics
resulting from the uncertainty of nodes sleep scheduling is
proposed

There are some problems with the residual time aware
forwarding strategy using the proposed RTA metric
Networking Laboratory 22/23
References
[1] Y. Yu, R. Govindan, and D. Estrin, Geographical and energy aware
routing: a recursive data dissemination,Technical Report UCLA/CSD-
TR-01-0023, UCLA Computer Science Department, 2001
[2] K. Seada, M. Zuniga, A. Helmy, and B. Krishnamachari, Energy-
efficient forwarding strategies for geographic routing in lossy wireless
sensor networks, in Proc. ACM SenSys 04, pp. 108121, 2004
[3] J. Sanchez, R. Marin-Perez, and P. Ruiz, BOSS: Beacon-less on
demand strategy for geographic routing in wireless sensor networks, in
Proc. IEEE MASS 07, pp. 110, 2007
[4] H. F., J. Widmer, M. M. Michael Ksemann, and H. Hartenstein,
Contention-based forwarding for mobile ad-hoc networks, Elseviers
Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 351369, 2003


Networking Laboratory 23/23
Thank you for your listening!
Networking Laboratory 24/23
Example
T
r
(S)
= 0.75; T
r
(A)
= 0.5; T
r
(B)
= 0.25
Assume T
max

= 0.5 s
T
max
(A)
= T
max
(B)
= min(T
r
(S)
, T
max

) =
0.5 s
Node A:
ADV(S,A) = 15-6 = 9



Node B:
ADV(S,B) = 15-8 = 7






M
s

V
s
M
a
V
a

Duty
cycle
4.25
s
2.125
s
0.75
s
0.375
s
15 %
t
s
e [2.125,6.375]; t
s
e [0.375,1.125]
Forwarding node S
Active time: 1 s; Sleep time: 3 s
Dist(S,dest)=15
R = 10
Node A
Active time: 1 s;
Sleep time: 2.75 s
Dist(A,dest)=6
Node B
Active time: 0.5 s;
Sleep time: 3 s
Dist(B,dest)=8


11
10
1 ,
5 . 0 5 . 0
10
9
1
5 . 0
min 1 ,
) , (
1
min
'
max
) (
max
) (
=

+ |
.
|

\
|

=

+ |
.
|

\
|

=
T T
R
A S ADV
T
j
A
r
A

( ) 09 . 0 , 0
) , (
1
) (
max
) (
~ +
(

= t random T
R
A S ADV
T
A
A
A
set
385 . 0 1 ,
5 . 0 5 . 0
10
7
1
25 . 0
min 1 ,
) , (
1
min
'
max
) (
max
) (
~

+ |
.
|

\
|

=

+ |
.
|

\
|

=
T T
R
B S ADV
T
j
B
r
B

( ) 365 . 0 , 0
) , (
1
) (
max
) (
~ +
(

= t random T
R
B S ADV
T
B
B
B
set