Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing Nick Moore / Ahmet S - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
virtual localization for mesh network routing
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing Nick Moore / Ahmet S - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Feb 05, 2023 233 likes •426 views

Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing 1/18 Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing Nick Moore / Ahmet S ekercio glu / Gregory K Egan Center for Telecommunications and Information Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne,

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 1/18

Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan

Center for Telecommunications and Information Engineering, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 2/18

Sensor Networks

  • Miniature sensors allow field measurements
  • Data must still be collected
  • Sensor networks allow sensors to communicate back to a central point
slide-3
SLIDE 3

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 3/18

Mesh Sensor Networks

  • All nodes are equal.
  • All routing computation is distributed.
  • Battery power is limited, and processing power and network usage are

therefore expensive.

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 4/18

Routing in a Mesh

How can we route packets across the mesh?

  • hierarchical partitioning too inflexible
  • packet flooding too inefficient
  • route flooding
  • location based routing
slide-5
SLIDE 5

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 5/18

Greedy Forwarding

Simplest algorithm for location based routing: forward packet to whichever neighbour is nearest the destination.

A B C D E F H J K M G L

  • −

− − − − − − − → HEFMDG is longer than − − − − − − → HEFCG, but F forwards to M as M is closer to G than C is.

  • −

− − → JKL is blocked by a ‘void’.

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 6/18

Determining Location

  • Na¨

ıve solution: GPS

  • ‘Anchor’ nodes (up to 20%)
  • Radio distance-finding
slide-7
SLIDE 7

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 7/18

Virtual Location

  • Location relative to other nodes
  • Axes do not correspond to real directions
  • Geometries may not correspond either
  • Internally consistent
  • Generally only useful for routing purposes
slide-8
SLIDE 8

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 8/18

n-neighbours

1 − n e i g h b

  • u

r 1−neighbour 1−neighbour 1−neighbour 2−neighbour

A D C B

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 9/18

Spring Models

A t t r a c t i

  • n

Attraction Repulsion

C B A

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 10/18

Forces and Potentials - Equations

  • Springlike attraction F ∝ d to 1-neighbours

Uij = katt · d2

ij

; katt = 1

  • Electrostatic-like repulsion F ∝ 1/d2 from 2-neighbours

Uik = krep · 1 dik + 1 ; krep = 8 × 106

  • Node attempts to minimize total potential energy

Ui =

  • j∈N

Uij

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 11/18

Forces and Potentials - 1D

min B A U_C = U_CA + U_CB U_CB (attraction) U_CA (repulsion)

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 12/18

Forces and Potentials - 2D

100 200 −100 100

slide-13
SLIDE 13

X A B C D E F G H I J K

slide-14
SLIDE 14

X A B C D

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 15/18

200-node Mesh

  • 200 nodes
  • Each node is placed so that:

⋄ at least one existing node is in range ⋄ no nodes are within range/2

  • similar to a rooftop network

http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/mesh/virt_loc/two.gif ./two.animated.gif

slide-16
SLIDE 16

200-node Mesh

Comparison:

006000 : 200 / 200 / 200

Actual Network Map

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 17/18

400-node Mesh

  • 400 nodes
  • Each node placed at random within a 1km x 1km grid
  • Node range 100m

http://www.ctie.monash.edu.au/mesh/virt_loc/one.gif ./one.animated.gif

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Nick Moore / Ahmet S ¸ekercio˘ glu / Gregory K Egan Virtual Localization for Mesh Network Routing – 18/18

Further Work

  • More sophisticated routing algorithms
  • 3D,4D virtual spaces (in submission to IEEE TPDS)
  • Node mobility / energy conservation
  • Multiple root nodes / anchors

Questions?