Prioritized epidemic routing for opportunistic networks

Ramanathan, Ram; Hansen, Richard E.; Basu, Prithwish; Rosales-Hain, R.; Krishnan, Rajesh

doi:10.1145/1247694.1247707

Cited by 271 publications

(156 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

155

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…First of all, we present a comparative simulation analysis among the proposed LDPR, EPI [2], PREP [3] and DHR [14] with respect to packet delivery ratio, normalized routing overhead and average end-to-end delay, where EPI is the earliest and wellknown routing protocol in DTNs, PREP is the best routing protocol in the flooding family, and DHR is the most outstanding routing protocol in the forwarding family. The number of nodes is set to be 50 and some other simulation parameters such as pause time, packet outing rate and number of sessions are only assumed to be 100 sec., 4 packets/sec.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It ensures a high probability of message delivery. Moreover, a number of ideas have been explored to improve the efficiency of EPI, including PREP [3] and probabilistic routing [4]. The key idea of PREP is to impose a partial ordering on the message called bundle.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If node A has met B frequently, and B has met C frequently, then A is likely to deliver messages to C through B. Similar metrics are used in a number of epidemic protocol variants [3], [4], where the buffer policies take advantage of physical locality and the fact that movement is not completely random. However, these protocols still transmit many copies of each message, making them very expensive.…”

Section: Epidemic Routingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, if some knowledge of the network is referred to as an additional routing metric, the flooding strategy can be significantly improved. Direct contact [6], [10], two-hop relay [6], [10], tree-based flooding [6], [10], EPI [2], PREP [3], probabilistic routing [4], and reconfigurable ubiquitous networked embedded systems (RUNES) routing protocols belong to the flooding family [10].…”

Section: Flooding Family Routing Protocols In Dtnsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A number of ideas have been explored to improve the efficiency of EPI, including prioritized epidemic routing (PREP) for opportunistic networks [3] and probabilistic routing in intermittently connected networks [4]. The use of network topology to estimate the transmission path and to increase the efficiency of routing has been studied in [5], [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A Priority Routing Protocol Based on Location and Moving Direction in Delay Tolerant Networks

Shen

Moh

Chung

2010

IEICE Trans. Inf. & Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYDelay Tolerant Networks (DTNs) are a class of emerging networks that experience frequent and long-duration partitions. Delay is inevitable in DTNs, so ensuring the validity and reliability of the message transmission and making better use of buffer space are more important than concentrating on how to decrease the delay. In this paper, we present a novel routing protocol named Location and Direction Aware Priority Routing (LDPR) for DTNs, which utilizes the location and moving direction of nodes to deliver a message from source to destination. A node can get its location and moving direction information by receiving beacon packets periodically from anchor nodes and referring to received signal strength indicator (RSSI) for the beacon. LDPR contains two schemes named transmission scheme and drop scheme, which take advantage of the nodes' information of the location and moving direction to transmit the message and store the message into buffer space, respectively. Each message, in addition, is branded a certain priority according to the message's attributes (e.g. importance, validity, security and so on). The message priority decides the transmission order when delivering the message and the dropping sequence when the buffer is full. Simulation results show that the proposed LDPR protocol outperforms epidemic routing (EPI) protocol, prioritized epidemic routing (PREP) protocol, and DTN hierarchical routing (DHR) protocol in terms of packet delivery ratio, normalized routing overhead and average end-to-end delay. It is worth noting that LDPR doesn't need infinite buffer size to ensure the packet delivery ratio as in EPI. In particular, even though the buffer size is only 50, the packet delivery ratio of LDPR can still reach 93.9%, which can satisfy general communication demand. We expect LDPR to be of greater value than other existing solutions in highly disconnected and mobile networks. key words: delay tolerant networks (DTNs), location and direction aware priority routing (LDPR), priority, buffer size

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Epidemic Routingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Flooding Family Routing Protocols In Dtnsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A Priority Routing Protocol Based on Location and Moving Direction in Delay Tolerant Networks

Shen

Moh

Chung

2010

IEICE Trans. Inf. & Syst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Enhanced fuzzy logic‐based spray and wait routing protocol for delay tolerant networks

Jain

Chawla

Soares

et al. 2014

Int J Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Delay tolerant networks are a class of ad hoc networks that enable data delivery even in the absence of end-to-end connectivity between nodes, which is the basic assumption for routing in ad hoc networks. Nodes in these networks work on store-carry and forward paradigm. In addition, such networks make use of message replication as a strategy to increase the possibility of messages reaching their destination. As contact opportunities are usually of short duration, it is important to prioritize scheduling of messages. Message replication may also lead to buffer congestion. Hence, buffer management is an important issue that greatly affects the performance of routing protocols in delay tolerant networks. In this paper, Spray and Wait routing protocol, which is a popular controlled replication-based protocol for delay tolerant networks, has been enhanced using a new fuzzy-based buffer management strategy Enhanced Fuzzy Spray and Wait Routing, with the aim to achieve increased delivery ratio and reduced overhead ratio. It aggregates three important message properties namely number of replicas of a message, its size, and remaining time-to-live, using fuzzy logic to determine the message priority, which denotes its importance with respect to other messages stored in a node's buffer. It then intelligently selects messages to schedule when a contact opportunity occurs. Because determination of number of replicas of a message in the network is a difficult task, a new method for estimation of the same has been proposed. Simulation results show improved performance of enhanced fuzzy spray and wait routing in terms of delivery ratio and resource consumption. many real life applications such as mobile sensor networks for wildlife tracking, interplanetary communications, underwater networks, pocket switched networks, and vehicular ad hoc networks (VANETs). [5]. These networks use a bundle layer, which is an overlay protocol lying between application layer and transport layer [5]. Bundles are arbitrary size messages consisting of multiple application packets, which are forwarded in store-carry and forward manner.Conventional ad hoc routing protocols fail to work in such environments as they lack continuous end-to-end connectivity between nodes because of frequent link disruptions. Therefore, such networks make use of store-carry-forward strategy to transfer messages between the nodes, that is, the nodes buffer the messages and transfer it when a contact opportunity arises, and this process is repeated until the message eventually reaches its destination. Similarly, a carry and forward scheme is used in VANETs [6]. This is also somewhat similar to the problem of data dissemination in wireless networks, which has been recently studied in [7], where the main objective is to spread a particular content in a network while guaranteeing a low completion time and also minimizing resource consumption. However, the delays between node meetings in DTNs may be very long varying from hours, days to years, and hence nodes must be capable of s...

show abstract

Performance analysis of hop‐limited epidemic routing in DTN with limited forwarding times

Deng

Huang

2014

Int J Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYBecause of the uncertainty of transmission opportunity in delay tolerant networks (DTN), routing algorithms in DTN often need nodes to serve as relays for others to carry and forward messages. One classic policy is the Epidemic routing (ER) algorithm. To reduce the overhead, the hop-limited ER protocol is proposed. This method can get better performance through controlling the message hop count. However, because of the energy constraint or other factors, each node may forward only limited times, that is, both the message hop count and the forwarding times may be limited. This paper proposes a unifying framework to evaluate the performance of ER with the aforementioned constraints. Simulations based on both synthetic and real motion traces show the accuracy of the framework. In addition, we explore the impact of many parameters (e.g., message hop count) through extensive numerical results. For example, numerical results show that both the message hop count and the forwarding times can have certain impact on the routing performance, but their impact is related with many other factors (e.g., the number of nodes). Copyright

show abstract

Prioritized epidemic routing for opportunistic networks

Cited by 271 publications

References 14 publications

A Priority Routing Protocol Based on Location and Moving Direction in Delay Tolerant Networks

A Priority Routing Protocol Based on Location and Moving Direction in Delay Tolerant Networks

Enhanced fuzzy logic‐based spray and wait routing protocol for delay tolerant networks

Performance analysis of hop‐limited epidemic routing in DTN with limited forwarding times

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About