Low Power, Low Delay: Opportunistic Routing meets Duty Cycling

Traditionally, routing in wireless sensor networks consists of two steps: First, the routing protocol selects a next hop, and, second, the MAC protocol waits for the intended destination to wake up and receive the data. This design makes it difficult to adapt to link dynamics and introduces delays while waiting for the next hop to wake up. In this paper we introduce ORW, a practical opportunistic routing scheme for wireless sensor networks. In a dutycycled setting, packets are addressed to sets of potential receivers and forwarded by the neighbor that wakes up first and successfully receives the packet. This reduces delay and energy consumption by utilizing all neighbors as potential forwarders. Furthermore, this increases resilience to wireless link dynamics by exploiting spatial diversity. Our results show that ORW reduces radio duty-cycles on average by 50% (up to 90% on individual nodes) and delays by 30% to 90% when compared to the state of the art

Let the Tree Bloom: Scalable Opportunistic Routing with ORPL

Routing in battery-operated wireless networks is challenging, posing a tradeoff between energy and latency. Previous work has shown that opportunistic routing can achieve low-latency data collection in duty-cycled networks. However, applications are now considered where nodes are not only periodic data sources, but rather addressable end points generating traffic with arbitrary patterns. We present ORPL, an opportunistic routing protocol that supports any-to-any, on-demand traffic. ORPL builds upon RPL, the standard protocol for low-power IPv6 networks. By combining RPL's tree-like topology with opportunistic routing, ORPL forwards data to any destination based on the mere knowledge of the nodes' sub-tree. We use bitmaps and Bloom filters to represent and propagate this information in a space-efficient way, making ORPL scale to large networks of addressable nodes. Our results in a 135-node testbed show that ORPL outperforms a number of state-of-the-art solutions including RPL and CTP, conciliating a sub-second latency and a sub-percent duty cycle. ORPL also increases robustness and scalability, addressing the whole network reliably through a 64-byte Bloom filter, where RPL needs kilobytes of routing tables for the same task

Performance Comparison of Contention- and Schedule-based MAC Protocols in Urban Parking Sensor Networks

Network traffic model is a critical problem for urban applications, mainly because of its diversity and node density. As wireless sensor network is highly concerned with the development of smart cities, careful consideration to traffic model helps choose appropriate protocols and adapt network parameters to reach best performances on energy-latency tradeoffs. In this paper, we compare the performance of two off-the-shelf medium access control protocols on two different kinds of traffic models, and then evaluate their application-end information delay and energy consumption while varying traffic parameters and network density. From the simulation results, we highlight some limits induced by network density and occurrence frequency of event-driven applications. When it comes to realtime urban services, a protocol selection shall be taken into account - even dynamically - with a special attention to energy-delay tradeoff. To this end, we provide several insights on parking sensor networks.Comment: ACM International Workshop on Wireless and Mobile Technologies for Smart Cities (WiMobCity) (2014

How to Choose the Relevant MAC Protocol for Wireless Smart Parking Urban Networks?

Parking sensor network is rapidly deploying around the world and is regarded as one of the first implemented urban services in smart cities. To provide the best network performance, the MAC protocol shall be adaptive enough in order to satisfy the traffic intensity and variation of parking sensors. In this paper, we study the heavy-tailed parking and vacant time models from SmartSantander, and then we apply the traffic model in the simulation with four different kinds of MAC protocols, that is, contention-based, schedule-based and two hybrid versions of them. The result shows that the packet interarrival time is no longer heavy-tailed while collecting a group of parking sensors, and then choosing an appropriate MAC protocol highly depends on the network configuration. Also, the information delay is bounded by traffic and MAC parameters which are important criteria while the timely message is required.Comment: The 11th ACM International Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Wireless Ad Hoc, Sensor, and Ubiquitous Networks (2014

RTXP : A Localized Real-Time Mac-Routing Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks

Protocols developed during the last years for Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) are mainly focused on energy efficiency and autonomous mechanisms (e.g. self-organization, self-configuration, etc). Nevertheless, with new WSN applications, appear new QoS requirements such as time constraints. Real-time applications require the packets to be delivered before a known time bound which depends on the application requirements. We particularly focus on applications which consist in alarms sent to the sink node. We propose Real-Time X-layer Protocol (RTXP), a real-time communication protocol. To the best of our knowledge, RTXP is the first MAC and routing real-time communication protocol that is not centralized, but instead relies only on local information. The solution is cross-layer (X-layer) because it allows to control the delays due to MAC and Routing layers interactions. RTXP uses a suited hop-count-based Virtual Coordinate System which allows deterministic medium access and forwarder selection. In this paper we describe the protocol mechanisms. We give theoretical bound on the end-to-end delay and the capacity of the protocol. Intensive simulation results confirm the theoretical predictions and allow to compare with a real-time centralized solution. RTXP is also simulated under harsh radio channel, in this case the radio link introduces probabilistic behavior. Nevertheless, we show that RTXP it performs better than a non-deterministic solution. It thus advocates for the usefulness of designing real-time (deterministic) protocols even for highly unreliable networks such as WSNs

A Case for Time Slotted Channel Hopping for ICN in the IoT

Recent proposals to simplify the operation of the IoT include the use of Information Centric Networking (ICN) paradigms. While this is promising, several challenges remain. In this paper, our core contributions (a) leverage ICN communication patterns to dynamically optimize the use of TSCH (Time Slotted Channel Hopping), a wireless link layer technology increasingly popular in the IoT, and (b) make IoT-style routing adaptive to names, resources, and traffic patterns throughout the network--both without cross-layering. Through a series of experiments on the FIT IoT-LAB interconnecting typical IoT hardware, we find that our approach is fully robust against wireless interference, and almost halves the energy consumed for transmission when compared to CSMA. Most importantly, our adaptive scheduling prevents the time-slotted MAC layer from sacrificing throughput and delay

Hierarchical routing protocols for wireless sensor network: a compressive survey

Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) are one of the key enabling technologies for the Internet of Things (IoT). WSNs play a major role in data communications in applications such as home, health care, environmental monitoring, smart grids, and transportation. WSNs are used in IoT applications and should be secured and energy efficient in order to provide highly reliable data communications. Because of the constraints of energy, memory and computational power of the WSN nodes, clustering algorithms are considered as energy efficient approaches for resource-constrained WSNs. In this paper, we present a survey of the state-of-the-art routing techniques in WSNs. We first present the most relevant previous work in routing protocols surveys then highlight our contribution. Next, we outline the background, robustness criteria, and constraints of WSNs. This is followed by a survey of different WSN routing techniques. Routing techniques are generally classified as flat, hierarchical, and location-based routing. This survey focuses on the deep analysis of WSN hierarchical routing protocols. We further classify hierarchical protocols based on their routing techniques. We carefully choose the most relevant state-of-the-art protocols in order to compare and highlight the advantages, disadvantage and performance issues of each routing technique. Finally, we conclude this survey by presenting a comprehensive survey of the recent improvements of Low-Energy Adaptive Clustering Hierarchy (LEACH) routing protocols and a comparison of the different versions presented in the literature