Presenter - Bob Kinicki Internet of Things Fall 2015

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Advisor : Prof. Yu-Chee Tseng Student : Yi-Chen Lu 12009/06/26.
Advertisements

1 S4: Small State and Small Stretch Routing for Large Wireless Sensor Networks Yun Mao 2, Feng Wang 1, Lili Qiu 1, Simon S. Lam 1, Jonathan M. Smith 2.
A 2 -MAC: An Adaptive, Anycast MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks Hwee-Xian TAN and Mun Choon CHAN Department of Computer Science, School of Computing.
HIERARCHY REFERENCING TIME SYNCHRONIZATION PROTOCOL Prepared by : Sunny Kr. Lohani, Roll – 16 Sem – 7, Dept. of Comp. Sc. & Engg.
TDMA Scheduling in Wireless Sensor Networks
Trickle: Code Propagation and Maintenance Neil Patel UC Berkeley David Culler UC Berkeley Scott Shenker UC Berkeley ICSI Philip Levis UC Berkeley.
Rumor Routing Algorithm For sensor Networks David Braginsky, Computer Science Department, UCLA Presented By: Yaohua Zhu CS691 Spring 2003.
1 Routing Techniques in Wireless Sensor networks: A Survey.
Gossip Scheduling for Periodic Streams in Ad-hoc WSNs Ercan Ucan, Nathanael Thompson, Indranil Gupta Department of Computer Science University of Illinois.
Monday, June 01, 2015 ARRIVE: Algorithm for Robust Routing in Volatile Environments 1 NEST Retreat, Lake Tahoe, June
Leveraging IP for Sensor Network Deployment Simon Duquennoy, Niklas Wirstrom, Nicolas Tsiftes, Adam Dunkels Swedish Institute of Computer Science Presenter.
An Analysis of the Optimum Node Density for Ad hoc Mobile Networks Elizabeth M. Royer, P. Michael Melliar-Smith and Louise E. Moser Presented by Aki Happonen.
PEDS September 18, 2006 Power Efficient System for Sensor Networks1 S. Coleri, A. Puri and P. Varaiya UC Berkeley Eighth IEEE International Symposium on.
Beneficial Caching in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Bin Tang, Samir Das, Himanshu Gupta Computer Science Department Stony Brook University.
KUASAR An efficient and light-weight protocol for routing and data dissemination in ad hoc wireless sensor networks David Andrews Aditya Mandapaka Joe.
More routing protocols Alec Woo June 18 th, 2002.
1-1 Topology Control. 1-2 What’s topology control?
On the Construction of Energy- Efficient Broadcast Tree with Hitch-hiking in Wireless Networks Source: 2004 International Performance Computing and Communications.
Distributed Priority Scheduling and Medium Access in Ad Hoc Networks Distributed Priority Scheduling and Medium Access in Ad Hoc Networks Vikram Kanodia.
Taming the Underlying Challenges of Reliable Multihop Routing in Sensor Networks.
Adaptive Self-Configuring Sensor Network Topologies ns-2 simulation & performance analysis Zhenghua Fu Ben Greenstein Petros Zerfos.
Beacon Vector Routing: Scalable Point-to-Point Routing in Wireless Sensornets.
A Transmission Control Scheme for Media Access in Sensor Networks Alec Woo, David Culler (University of California, Berkeley) Special thanks to Wei Ye.
Power saving technique for multi-hop ad hoc wireless networks.
Dynamic Clustering for Acoustic Target Tracking in Wireless Sensor Network Wei-Peng Chen, Jennifer C. Hou, Lui Sha Presented by Ray Lam Oct 23, 2004.
Empirical Analysis of Transmission Power Control Algorithms for Wireless Sensor Networks CENTS Retreat – May 26, 2005 Jaein Jeong (1), David Culler (1),
MAC Reliable Broadcast in Ad Hoc Networks Ken Tang, Mario Gerla University of California, Los Angeles (ktang,
Ad Hoc Wireless Routing COS 461: Computer Networks
Ad Hoc Networking via Named Data Michael Meisel, Vasileios Pappas, and Lixia Zhang UCLA, IBM Research MobiArch’10, September 24, Shinhaeng.
Unwanted Link Layer Traffic in Large IEEE Wireless Network By Naga V K Akkineni.
Itrat Rasool Quadri ST ID COE-543 Wireless and Mobile Networks
1 Pertemuan 20 Teknik Routing Matakuliah: H0174/Jaringan Komputer Tahun: 2006 Versi: 1/0.
Dynamic Clustering for Acoustic Target Tracking in Wireless Sensor Network Wei-Peng Chen, Jennifer C. Hou, Lui Sha.
A Framework for Energy- Saving Data Gathering Using Two-Phase Clustering in Wireless Sensor Networks Wook Chio, Prateek Shah, and Sajal K. Das Center for.
TinyOS By Morgan Leider CS 411 with Mike Rowe with Mike Rowe.
2015/10/1 A color-theory-based energy efficient routing algorithm for mobile wireless sensor networks Tai-Jung Chang, Kuochen Wang, Yi-Ling Hsieh Department.
College of Engineering Non-uniform Grid- based Coordinated Routing Priyanka Kadiyala Major Advisor: Dr. Robert Akl Department of Computer Science and Engineering.
 Network Segments  NICs  Repeaters  Hubs  Bridges  Switches  Routers and Brouters  Gateways 2.
TRICKLE: A Self-Regulating Algorithm for Code Propagation and Maintenance in Wireless Sensor Networks Philip Levis, Neil Patel, Scott Shenker and David.
1/30 Energy-Efficient Forwarding Strategies for Geographic Routing in Lossy Wireless Sensor Networks Wireless and Sensor Network Seminar Dec 01, 2004.
Advanced Computer Networks Fall 2013
Rushing Attacks and Defense in Wireless Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols ► Acts as denial of service by disrupting the flow of data between a source and.
A Remote Code Update Mechanism for Wireless Sensor Networks Thanos Stathopoulos, John Heidemann and Deborah Estrin CEG 790 Presentation By: Trevor Smith.
REED: Robust, Efficient Filtering and Event Detection in Sensor Networks Daniel Abadi, Samuel Madden, Wolfgang Lindner MIT United States VLDB 2005.
Minimizing Energy Consumption in Sensor Networks Using a Wakeup Radio Matthew J. Miller and Nitin H. Vaidya IEEE WCNC March 25, 2004.
Implementation of Collection Tree Protocol in QualNet
Data Collection and Dissemination. Learning Objectives Understand Trickle – an data dissemination protocol for WSNs Understand data collection protocols.
SRL: A Bidirectional Abstraction for Unidirectional Ad Hoc Networks. Venugopalan Ramasubramanian Ranveer Chandra Daniel Mosse.
A Power Assignment Method for Multi-Sink WSN with Outage Probability Constraints Marcelo E. Pellenz*, Edgard Jamhour*, Manoel C. Penna*, Richard D. Souza.
Energy-Conserving Data Placement and Asynchronous Multicast in Wireless Sensor Networks Sagnik Bhattacharya, Hyung Kim, Shashi Prabh, Tarek Abdelzaher.
a/b/g Networks Routing Herbert Rubens Slides taken from UIUC Wireless Networking Group.
A Multi-Channel Cooperative MIMO MAC Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks(MCCMIMO) MASS 2010.
A Few Random IoT Thoughts PEDS Seminar PEDS Seminar November 23, 2015 November 23, 2015.
Self-stabilizing energy-efficient multicast for MANETs.
Integration of Wireless Sensor Networks to the Internet of Things using a 6LoWPAN Gateway Integration of Wireless Sensor Networks to the Internet of Things.
A Bandwidth Scheduling Algorithm Based on Minimum Interference Traffic in Mesh Mode Xu-Yajing, Li-ZhiTao, Zhong-XiuFang and Xu-HuiMin International Conference.
RBP: Robust Broadcast Propagation in Wireless Networks Fred Stann, John Heidemann, Rajesh Shroff, Muhammad Zaki Murtaza USC/ISI In SenSys 2006.
Toward Reliable and Efficient Reporting in Wireless Sensor Networks Authors: Fatma Bouabdallah Nizar Bouabdallah Raouf Boutaba.
RPL under Mobility Consumer Communications and Networking Conference, 2012 RPL under Mobility K.C. Lee, R. Sudhaakar, L. Dai, S. Addepalli and M. Gerla.
KAIS T Location-Aided Flooding: An Energy-Efficient Data Dissemination Protocol for Wireless Sensor Networks Harshavardhan Sabbineni and Krishnendu Chakrabarty.
Performance Comparison of Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols Presented by Venkata Suresh Tamminiedi Computer Science Department Georgia State University.
1 Ad-hoc Transport Layer Protocol (ATCP) EECS 4215.
MAC Protocols for Sensor Networks
MAC Protocols for Sensor Networks
Lecture 28 Mobile Ad hoc Network Dr. Ghalib A. Shah
Data Collection and Dissemination
Ad-hoc Transport Layer Protocol (ATCP)
Trickle: Code Propagation and Maintenance
Data Collection and Dissemination
The Impact of Multihop Wireless Channel on TCP Performance
Presentation transcript:

Presenter - Bob Kinicki Internet of Things Fall 2015 The Emergence of a Networking Primitive in Wireless Sensor Networks P. Levis, E. Brewer, D. Culler, D. Gay, S. Madden, N. Patel, J. Polastre, S. Shenker, R. Szewczyk and A. Woo CACM Volume 51, Number 7 Presenter - Bob Kinicki Internet of Things Fall 2015

Internet of Things Trickle Outline Introduction WSN WSN Protocols Dissemination Protocols Collection Protocols Trickle Algorithm Maté Case Study Trickle Discussion Conclusions Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Introduction Sensors are normally on a mote platform with a low-power CMOS radio. Mote constraints include: Power supply Limited memory (a few kilobytes of RAM) Unattended operation Lossy and transient wireless communications WSNs (a collection of motes) are typically embedded in physical environment associated with their application. Internet of Things Trickle

Wireless Sensor Networks Physical device location often dictated by application and physical constraints. Any retransmission, response or ACK contributes to contention, interference and loss. Redundancy is essential to reliability! The variety of WSN topologies and densities calls for a polite, density-aware, local retransmission policy. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Networking Protocols Network protocols focus on minimizing transmissions and providing reliability (namely, making sure transmitted packets arrive successfully). Most sensor networks rely on two multi-hop protocols: a collection protocol for pulling data out of a network. A dissemination protocol for pushing data into a network. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Dissemination WSN administrators need to adjust how the network collects data by changing the sampled sensors, the sampling rate or the code running on the nodes. Administrator needs to disseminate these changes to every node in the network. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Dissemination Early systems used flooding to disseminate. Flooding can be unreliable and many, concurrent packet broadcasts yield a broadcast storm. Adaptive flooding uses an estimate of node density to limit the flooding rate. Getting this to work across network densities is tricky! Internet of Things Trickle

Dissemination Protocols Another view – dissemination protocols ensure every node eventually has a consistent version of a shared state. Casting dissemination as a data consistency problem means it does not provide full reliability. Eventual consistency only implies delivery of the most recent version to connected nodes. Internet of Things Trickle

Dissemination Protocols An effective dissemination protocol needs to bring nodes up to date quickly while sending few packets when every node has the most recent version. Hence, this is a requirement for the underlying consistency mechanism. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Collection Protocols WSNs report observations on a remote environment and thereby need a collection protocol. Collection protocols provide unreliable datagram delivery to a collection point using a minimum-cost routing tree. Typically cost measured in ETX (expected number of transmissions) which is related to packet delivery rate. Nodes send packets on the route that requires the fewest transmissions to reach a collection point. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Collection Protocols An early collection protocol, directed diffusion, used collection trees based on data-specific node requests. Experiences with low-power wireless networks moved strategies towards a simpler approach where each node decides on a single next hop for all forwarded traffic.  creating routing trees to fixed collection points. Tree built using a routing cost gradient. Collection point has a cost of 0. Internet of Things Trickle

Figure 2: Collection Tree Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Collection Protocols Collection variation includes: How to quantify and calculate link costs. The number of links in the tree. How link state changes are propagated. How frequently to re-evaluate link costs and switch parents. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Collection Protocols Early collection protocols used link costs. Second generation (similar to AODV and DSDV) used periodic broadcasts to estimate transmissions per delivery. Third generation added physical layer quality data. Current generation (e.g., Collection Tree Protocol (CTP)) gets information from multiple layers. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Collection Protocols Newer protocols reduce control traffic to increase efficiency. However, they need to send link-layer broadcasts to their local neighbors to advertise their presence and routing cost. Transmission frequency of routing advertisements causes design tension. Protocols reduce this tension by converting routing gradient to a data consistency problem. Internet of Things Trickle

Data Consistency Mechanism To address both dissemination and collection protocols as a problem of maintaining data consistency, the data consistency requirements are: Resolve inconsistencies quickly. Send few packet when data is consistent. Require very little state. Trickle meets these three requirements. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Trickle algorithm establishes a density-aware local broadcast with an underlying consistency model that guides when a node communicates. The algorithm controls the send rate such that each node hears a trickle of packets (enough to stay consistent). Trickle relies only on local broadcasts and its basic mechanism is a randomized suppressive broadcast. Internet of Things Trickle

Trickle Algorithm [Bjamaa 15] Trickle variables: c consistency counter I Trickle interval t transmission time Trickle configuration parameters: Imin minimum interval size (time units) Imax determines maximum interval size as: Imin x 2Imax k redundancy constant Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Trickle Algorithm 0. Initialization: I  random value in range [Imin, Imin x 2Imax]; 1. c  0; Pick t uniformly at random from range [I/2, I]; start timer; {anytime during interval, if node hears a consistent message increment c;} 2. Once timer reaches t iff c < k node transmits message; suppression possible! 3. When I expires, double interval length until I reaches Imin x 2Imax; go to 1. {anytime during interval, if node hears an inconsistent message and if I > Imin then (I  Imin ; go to 1) } Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Message Suppression Listen-only period addresses short-listen problem. When c > k , state is consistent and other transmissions are suppressed. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Short-listen Problem Short-listen comes from non-synchronized intervals among neighbors. N2 and N3 in (b) suffer from short-listen problem. (c) shows listen-only impact. Internet of Things Trickle

Figure 4: Transmissions vs Nodes These graphs assume nodes are synchronized. Internet of Things Trickle

Figure 5: Listen-only Effect Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Maté Case Study Maté :: a lightweight, bytecode interpreter for WSNs. Maté uses Trickle as a propagation service to periodically broadcast version summaries. 30-byte code fits into one frame. Consistency mechanism – broadcast missing routines 1,3 and 7 seconds after hearing there is an inconsistency. Trickle resources are small (70 bytes RAM, 11 bytes counters, 1.8K executable). Internet of Things Trickle

TOSSIM Simulation Details TOSSIM, a TinyOS simulator, models wireless connectivity at the bit level and wireless loss. Node density modeled via spacing between nodes (5 to 20 ft. in 5 ft. increments). Imin = 1 second; Imin x 2Imax = 1 minute; 400 sensor nodes “regularly spaced” in a 20 x 20 grid (note - graph shows distances between a 19 x 19). Internet of Things Trickle

Figure 7: Time to Consistency Crossing the network takes from 6 to 40 hops. Time to complete propagation varied from 16 sec (dense network) to 70 sec (sparce network). Minimum per hop delay is Imin/2 with 1 sec broadcast time  best case delay is 1.5 sec/hop. Claim: graphs show nodes cooperate efficiently. Internet of Things Trickle

Figure 8: Consistency Rate Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Uses and Improvements Trickle used in many dissemination protocols today (e.g., Deluge, MNP, Drip and Tenet). More efficient collection protocols also using Trickle for consistency (e.g., TinyOS, 6LoWPAN IPv6 routing tables and ICMP neighbor lists). Drawback – Trickle maintenance costs grow O (n) with number of data items. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Trickle Discussion WSNs do not know interconnection topology apriori. This topology is not static (even when nodes are NOT mobile). Redundancy both helps and hurts! Trickle’s design comes from two areas: Controlled, density-aware flooding algorithms from wireless and multicast networks Epidemic and gossip algorithms for maintaining data consistency in distributed systems. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Trickle Discussion Trickle adapts to local network density like controlled flooding, but continually maintains consistency in a manner similar to epidemic algorithms. Trickle uses broadcast nature of wireless channel to conserve energy. Trickle’s exponential times work in reverse of standard backoff. Namely, it defaults to largest time window and decreases only for inconsistency. Internet of Things Trickle

Trickle Discussion (cont) Internet of Things Trickle Trickle leads to energy-efficient, density-aware dissemination by avoiding collisions and suppressing unnecessary retransmissions. Trickle suppresses implicitly through nearby nodes that hear a broadcast. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle Conclusions Two authors also authored original Trickle RFC (author list is impressive). Paper puts Trickle into a WSN routing context and does not just define Trickle. Trickle algorithm explanation is not concise. Discussed well the tension in performance associated with run time choices. Paper shows basic performance trends and Maté case study. Internet of Things Trickle

Internet of Things Trickle References [Djamaa 2015] Djamaa, B. and Richardson, M. The Trickle Algorithm: Issues and Solutions. Cranfield Univesity Reseach Report. January 2015. Internet of Things Trickle