GPSR: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless Networks

B. Karp, H. T. Kung
Borrowed some slides from Richard Yangs

Motivation
A sensor net consists of hundreds or thousands of

nodes

Scalability is the issue Existing ad hoc net protocols, e.g., DSR, AODV, ZRP, require nodes to cache e2e route information Dynamic topology changes Mobility

Reduce caching overhead Hierarchical routing is usually based on well defined, rarely changing administrative boundaries Geographic routing
Use location for routing

Scalability metrics
Routing protocol msg cost
How

many control packets sent?

Per node state How much storage per node is required?

E2E packet delivery success rate

Assumptions
Every node knows its location
Positioning

devices like GPS Localization

A source can get the location of the

destination

802.11 MAC Link bidirectionality

Geographic Routing: Greedy Routing

Closest to D

- Find neighbors who are the closer to the destination - Forward the packet to the neighbor closest to the destination
5

Benefits of GF
A node only needs to remember the location

info of one-hop neighbors Routing decisions can be dynamically made

Greedy Forwarding does NOT always work

GF fails

If the network is dense enough that each

interior node has a neighbor in every 2/3 angular sector, GF will always succeed
7

Dealing with Void: Right-Hand Rule

Apply the right-hand rule to traverse the

edges of a void

Pick the next anticlockwise edge Traditionally used to get out of a maze
8

Right Hand Rule on Convex Subdivision

For convex subdivision, right hand rule is equivalent to traversing the face with the crossing edges removed.

Right-Hand Rule Does Not Work with Cross Edges

z u

w
x

x originates a packet to u

Right-hand rule results in the tour x-u-z-w-u-x

10

Remove Crossing Edge

z u

w
x

Make

the graph planar (w,z) from the graph

Remove

Right-hand rule results in the tour x-u-z-v-x

11

Make a Graph Planar

Convert a connectivity graph to planar non-

crossing graph by removing bad edges

Ensure the original graph will not be disconnected Two types of planar graphs:
Relative Neighborhood Graph (RNG) Gabriel Graph (GG)

12

Relative Neighborhood Graph

Connection

uv can exist if w u, v, d(u,v) < max[d(u,w),d(v,w)]

not empty remove uv

13

Gabriel Graph
An edge (u,v) exists between vertices

w is present within the circle whose diameter is uv. w u, v, d2(u,v) < [d2(u,w) + d2(v,w)] Not empty remove uv

u and v if no other vertex

14

Properties of GG and RNG

RNG is a sub-graph of

RNG

GG

Because RNG removes more edges

GG

If the original graph is

connected, RNG is also connected

15

Connectedness of RNG Graph

Key observation
Any

edge on the minimum spanning tree of the original graph is not removed Proof by contradiction: Assume (u,v) is such an edge but removed in RNG
w

v
16

Examples

Full graph
200 nodes

GG subset

RNG subset

randomly placed on a 2000 x 2000 meter region radio range of 250 m

Bonus: remove redundant, competing path less collision

17

Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR)

Maintenance

all nodes maintain a single-hop neighbor table Use RNG or GG to make the graph planar

At source:

mode = greedy

Intermediate node:

if (mode == greedy) { greedy forwarding; if (fail) mode = perimeter; } if (mode == perimeter) { if (have left local maxima) mode = greedy; else (right-hand rule); }
18

GPSR

greedy fails

Greedy Forwarding

Perimeter Forwarding

have left local maxima greedy works greedy fails

19

Implementation Issues
Graph planarization RNG & GG planarization depend on having the current location info of a nodes neighbors Mobility may cause problems Re-planarize when a node enters or leaves the radio range

Also, assumes a circular radio transmission model In general, it could be harder & more expensive than it sounds

20

What if a node only moves in the radio range? To avoid this problem, the graph should be re-planarize for every beacon msg

Performance evaluation
Simulation in ns-2

Baseline: DSR (Dynamic Source Routing

Random waypoint model A node chooses a destination uniformly at random Choose velocity uniformly at random in the configurable range simulated max velocity 20m/s A node pauses after arriving at a waypoint 300, 600 & 900 pause times

21

 50, 112 & 200 nodes

22

sending nodes & 30 flows About 20 neighbors for each node very dense CBR (2Kbps)
Nominal radio range: 250m (802.11 WaveLan

radio) Each simulation takes 900 seconds Take an average of the six different randomly generated motion patterns

22

Packet Delivery Success Rate

23

Routing Protocol Overhead

24

Related Work
Geographic and Energy Aware Routing

(GEAR), UCLA Tech Report, 2000

Consider remaining energy in addition to geographic location to avoid quickly draining energy of the node closest to the destination

Geographic probabilistic routing,

International workshop on wireless ad-hoc networks, 2005

Determine

the packet forwarding probability to each neighbor based on its location, residual energy, and link reliability
25

 Beacon vector routing, NSDI 2005 Beacons know their locations Forward a packet towards the beacon A Scalable Location Service for Geographic Ad Hoc

Routing, MobiCom 00

Distributed location service

Landmark routing Paul F. Tsuchiya. Landmark routing: Architecture, algorithms and issues. Technical Report MTR-87W00174, MITRE Corporation, September 1987. Classic work with many follow-ups

26

Questions?

27