You are on page 1of 9

2013 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS)

May 28-31, 2013, Grand Hyatt Atlanta, Atlanta, GA

Mobile Networking with UAVs: Opportunities and


Challenges
Ozgur Koray SAHINGOZ
Turkish Air Force Academy
Computer Engineering Department
34149, Yesilyurt-Istanbul, Turkey
sahingoz@hho.edu.tr

Abstract—With the advances in computation, civilian areas. It is relatively easy task to use
sensor, communication and networking UAVs in an Unmanned Aerial System (UAS) for
technologies, utilization of Unmanned Aerial increasing communication range and data
Vehicles (UAVs) for military and civilian areas has aggregation capability. For example, if all
become extremely popular for the last two decades. communication infrastructures are collapsed in a
Since small UAVs are relatively cheap, the focus is disaster area, and there is an immediate need to
changing, and usage of several small UAVs is build a network between rescue teams, then UAVs
preferred rather than one large UAV. This change can easily be used as a communication relay
in orientation is dramatic, and it is resulting to between rescue teams to coordinate rescue
develop new networking technologies between activities effectively [1].
UAVs, which can constitute swarm UAV teams for
executing specific tasks with different levels of intra For enhancing system endurance, expanding
and inter vehicle communication especially for the coverage area and carrying powerful
coordination and control of the system. Setting up a processors, a large UAV, such as Predator and
UAV network not only extends operational scope Global Hawk, is preferred in single vehicle UASs,
and range but also enables quick and reliable in which setting up a communication environment
response time. Because UAVs are highly mobile is easy. In this type missions, star topology is
nodes for networking, setting up an ad-hoc network typically preferred to facilitate mutual
is a challenging issue, and this networking has some communication with one hop transmission over
requirements, which differ from traditional the UAV. To solve some challenging issues such
networks, mobile ad-hoc networks (MANETs) and as increasing the transmission range, sending more
vehicular ad-hoc networks (VANETs) in terms of data and minimizing the interference, typically
connectivity, routing process, services, applications, high gain directional antennas are preferred rather
etc. In this paper, it is aimed to point out the than omnidirectional antennas. Undoubtedly, this
challenges in the usage of UAVs as mobile nodes in leads a limited improvement in the performance of
an ad-hoc network and to depict open research UAS.
issues with analyzing the opportunities and future
works. On the other hand, despite the restricted
capabilities like power, sensing, communication,
Keywords— UAV, MANET, VANET, Mobility, and computation, there is an increasing attention
Networking on mini and multi-UAVs due to their flexibilities
and cost advantages. Although, it improves the
I. INTRODUCTİON
capability and capacity of UAS, it has a
Because of the rapid technological challenging issue: efficient communication of
advancement on electronics and sensor UAVs.
technologies Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs)
have been indispensable in both military and

978-1-4799-0817-2/13/$31.00 ©2013 IEEE 933


Developing a fully autonomous and information like UAS and MANET, are described.
cooperative multi-UAV system requires robust Section III depicts the ad-hoc networking concepts
inter vehicle communication networking in an ad- with flying objects. Section IV introduces different
hoc manner. Researches on static networks, networking models for FANET Network Layer.
Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks (MANETs), and slowly Finally, conclusion and future works are
moving Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks (VANETs) explained.
do not address the unique characteristics of UAV
networks, which use highly mobile nodes. II. BACKGROUD
Therefore, there is a need of defining new ad-hoc A. Unmanned Aerial System (UAS)
networking model, which differs from other kinds Due to improvements in communication,
of ad-hoc networks along the connectivity, quality computation, sensor and energy storage
of services, sensor types, node movement features, technologies of UAVs, operating expenses of
data delivery, service discovery, etc. UAVs are decreased and UASs have shown
In the literature, there are some researches exceptional promises for a large number of
which define the explained networking model with application areas such as in managing wildfire
different names as depicted in Table 1. [11], hurricane tracking [12], monitoring
biological activity [13], relay for sensor networks
TABLE I. Names of Highly Mobile
[1, 14, 15], airspeed calibration [16], agricultural
Networking Model
remote sensing [17].
Given Name Reference A typical UAS consists of:
Airborne Networks [2], [3]  one or more UAV(s),
(Airborne Telemetry Networks,
Airborne Communication Networks,  payloads (sensors, lethal, nonlethal
Airborne Backbone Networks, etc.) weapons, etc.),
Unmanned Aeronautical Ad-hoc [4], [5]  command and control systems (ground data
Networks (UAANETs) terminals, air traffic control station,
static/portable ground control stations, etc.),
UAV Ad Hoc Networks [6]
 support equipment (launcher, maintenance,
Networks of UAVs [7], [8]
recovery vehicles, etc.)
Distributed Aerial Sensor Networks [9]
 control and data transmission links
Flying Ad Hoc Networks (FANET) [10] (depends on usage area (military/civilian)).
The most important of the above-mentioned
Although the used names have little differences in components is UAVs, which deliver the payload
definitions, it is an explicitly seen fact that the or data to its receivers. Therefore, the performance
new communication model is a special form of and capacity of the UAS directly related to the
VANET. Therefore, it is considered to be more abilities of the UAVs, such as endurance, range,
appropriate to use this new networking model as altitude, payload, etc. To increase the application
FANET [10]. areas of UAVs and to decrease the personnel
As with the development strategies of ad-hoc needs, UAVs also need to fly freely in the
networking, it can be clearly foreseen that in the enormous sky and complete the mission
future, UAVs will represent an attractive function autonomously without any centralized controller at
for setting up a highly mobile networks with the ground station.
extended operational range. Therefore, in this B. Mobile Ad-Hoc Networking (MANET)
paper, it is aimed to present the challenges and A MANET is a collection of independent
networking concepts in FANET, and some open mobile nodes, which are connected with wireless
issues and future works are depicted. links, such as IEEE 802.11 a/b/g/n, 802.16, etc.
The remainder of this paper is organized as Besides, it configures dynamically an
follows: In the following section background infrastructure-less network by using these mobile

934
Fig. 1. A Network-Centric Architecture in a battlefield
nodes not only as hosts but also as routers. These lower layers. Besides, a network layer is
nodes are free to move, and the network topology principally responsible for the routing process,
changes rapidly over time. Due to the nature of the which is liable for selecting an appropriate path in
wireless links, the connection between nodes loses the network to send data from the source node to
its strength and even disappears sometimes. destination node(s).
The MANET nodes, such as notebook, Usage of a number UAVs in a networked
netbooks, tablets, sensor nodes, etc., should be structure brings some advantages as follows [10]:
mobile; therefore, they are generally small and Speed-up: The missions, such as
have limited processor/energy capacity. It is
reconnaissance, surveillance, search and rescue,
difficult to build and maintain such type of
can be completed faster with proportional to the
network. Therefore, some main functionalities of
number of UAVs.
network layer, such as routing, should be done by
these mobile nodes dynamically. Cost: Instead of using a large UAV, the usage
of a number of small UAVs cost lower in terms of
With the increase in utilization rates, and
acquisition and maintenance.
applications areas of MANET, mobile nodes are
begun to embed in vehicles, such as cars, Scalability: It increases the size of operation
ambulances, fire engines, tanks, etc. This new areas by adding new UAVs. System dynamically
networking concept called as Vehicular Ad-Hoc rearranged its network structure according to new
Network (VANET), and it extends the range of locations of UAVs.
MANETs and enables its usage in new application Survivability: Multi UAV systems are tolerant
areas. to faults of UAVs. In case of a falling down of a
III. AD HOC NETWORKING WITH FLYING UAV, the operation can continue with the
NODES remaining ones.
Combining the use of UAVs in an ad-hoc Low detectability (Low radar cross-section):
network is a promising issue, and it necessitates a Radar cross-section is crucial for military
new networking layer between UAVs. This applications. Small UAVs have low radar cross-
networking layer can be defined as a sublayer of section, low infrared signature, and low acoustic
Aerial Network Layer (FANET) as depicted in signature. Therefore, it is hard to detect them in
Figure 1. The main role of this UAV Network the air (especially with respect to planes and large
Layer is to act as a mediator between upper and UAVs)

935
Although usage of multi-UAV systems has a networked communication are emerged as vital
number of advantages, routing in FANET is still a issues to solve. Especially in some scenarios the
challenging issue because the network topology heterogenic UAVs that are equipped with different
may change dynamically and the available payload capacity, sensors, avionics,
information about the network is not precise. communication range, and flight endurance;
Fueled by this need, some routing protocols for communication and coordination of UAVs are a
FANETs have been proposed in the literature. In challenging task in order to achieve such a flying
these solutions the communication types, which network. According to the US UAV Roadmap
are crucial for selecting routing algorithm, can be [18], to achieve robust and reliable UAV
categorized as follows: communications, some networking technologies
have to be developed as follows;
UAV-to-UAV communication: In this type
communication, UAVs communicate with each  High capacity directional data links,
other in order to fill the need with different
applications and services such as cooperative path  High capacity routers with large processing
planning and target tracking. It can be direct or capacity,
multi-hop over other UAVs and can benefit from  Modular and programmable router
mesh routing protocols. UAVs can have short architecture,
range and long range of communication between
them, and this can increase the efficiency of the  Standardized protocols and interfaces,
FANET in terms of data rate and/or  Embedded network security.
communication range.
 and mobile ad-hoc networking is needed
UAV-to-Infrastructure communication: In this not only for establishing an UAV-to-UAV
type of communication, UAVs are able to network, but also to be employed as a
communicate with fixed infrastructure like ground coordination and control infrastructure.
station, satellite or warship near the mission area
to provide information services for other users in As depicted, networking between UAVs is a
the global networks. challenging issue, and in the following section
different routing protocols are described.
By using these communication links, a FANET
structure can be quickly deployed into the mission IV. NETWORKING MODELS
field. Therefore, usage of UAVs in MANET There are many existing routing protocols in
makes routing easier and improves the ad-hoc wireless networks like pre-computed
performance of wireless communication systems. routing, on-demand routing, location based
For example, in many ad-hoc communication routing, flooding, etc [19, 20]. As a result of the
scenarios like VANET; there exist some obstacles limited spectrum, to increase FANET
like mountains, buildings, etc. They critically communication performance, there is a need to
deteriorate or even obstruct the signal between the decrease transmitting power by sending a message
sender and the receiver. By using FANET, two to closer nodes (UAVs) and using multi-hop
ground stations can easily communicate over routing between communicating parts. Therefore,
UAVs with a well-established network structure. typical MANET routing protocols are preferred for
Communication between UAVs and UAV-to- FANET. There are several routing algorithms in
Infrastructure is also a challenging issue. Different MANET, and most of them are not directly
type of antennas can be used for improving system applicable for the FANET due to the UAV-
performance. Especially by the usage of GPS specific issues, like quick changes in link quality.
receivers, which can be easily installed in vehicles, Therefore, some specific ad-hoc networking
and the usage of directed antennas like phased protocols have been implemented in the literature.
array antennas; communication can be effectively These protocols can be categorized in three main
set in FANET. classes;
While the number of UAVs is increasing in  static protocols: which have static routing
UASs, installing and maintenance of the tables.

936
 proactive protocols: which periodically refresh not only the number of nodes but also the
routing tables. operation area.
 reactive protocols: which discover routes of Hierarchically organized UAV networks
messages on demand. consist of a number of clusters, which operates in
different mission areas as shown in Figure 3. Each
By using these routing protocols, FANET can cluster has a cluster head (CH), which represents
dynamically discover routes between the whole cluster, and it is in connection with the
communicating ends, and it can scale to a large upper/lower layers (ground stations, UAVs,
area by allowing addition and subtraction of UAV satellites, etc.) directly or indirectly. Each mobile
nodes dynamically. node is in the direct transmission range of the CH.
A. STATIC ROUTING PROTOCOLS At the same time, it also disseminates data (by
In this type routing protocols, routing table of each broadcasting) and control information to the nodes
in the cluster. This model is better if the UAVs are
node has been computed before starting the
organized in different swarms, mission area is
mission and loaded to UAV nodes. Each node can
large, and many UAVs are used in the network.
communicate with a few UAVs. Therefore, they
are not fault tolerant and appropriate for dynamic
environments.
Load Carry and Deliver Routing (LCAD)
[21, 22] is a relatively easier routing model in
which an UAV gets data from a ground node (as
source node); after that, it carries the data to the
destination by flying, and finally it delivers the
data to a destination ground node as depicted in
Figure 2. This routing methodology is feasible for
especially delay-tolerant applications like secure
data routing with minimum hops and latency-
insensitive bulk data transfer. LCAD routing aims
to maximize the throughput, while increasing the
security. Fig. 3. Hierarchical Routing Model
Data Centric Routing: Due to the nature of
the wireless communication structure of UAVs,
one-to-many data transmission can be preferred to
one-to-one data transmission [25, 26]. This routing
is preferred when the data is requested by a
number of nodes, and it is distributed according to
on-demand algorithms. Publish-subscribe model
typically used for this type routing, and it
automatically connects data producer and
consumer nodes. Routing is done with respect to
the content of data; and if needed, data
Fig. 2. Load Carry and Deliver Routing Model aggregation algorithms can be used for energy-
Multi-Level Hierarchical Routing: Due to the efficient dissemination as depicted in Figure 4.
structure of the typical VANET environment, the This type routing performs three dimensions of
routing protocols are especially organized as flat decoupling;
routing in 2 dimensional space. In large-scale
 Space decoupling: this technique does not
VANETs with hundreds and thousands of mobile need a binding between the sender and the
nodes, typical flat routing causes performance
receiver. Sender does not need to know the
degradation. To solve this network scalability receiver nodes address and/or location.
problem, one probable solution is the usage of
hierarchical routing protocols [23, 24]. It increases
937
Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV)
is a table driven proactive routing protocol, which
guarantees loop-free routes by using sequence
numbers for each path [28]. Each node maintains a
routing table for all other nodes, not just for the
neighboring nodes. It provides a single path to
each destination nodes, and it is selected by using
the distance vector shortest path routing algorithm.
DSDV also uses a large amount of periodic update
messages, and this brings an overhead to the
Fig. 4. Data Centric Routing Model network.
 Time decoupling: means that communicating C. REACTIVE ROUTING PROTOCOLS
parties do not need to be on-line at the same Reactive routing protocol (RRP) is designed to
time to communicate. overcome the overhead problem of PRP. In RRP,
 Flow decoupling: results an asynchronous a route between communicating nodes is
communication structure; therefore, message determined according to the demand from the
sending operation does not block both sender source node. The source node starts the route
and receiver sides. discovery process by sending a route request
message to the network. The route is determined
This model especially preferred for the cluster according to incoming route reply message from
structured UAS, and it drives the UAV mission the destination node. As a result, each node
along a predetermined flight-plan and does make maintains only the routes that are currently in use.
high level cooperation between UAVs.
Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) is a simple and
B. PROACTIVE ROUTING PROTOCOLS efficient reactive routing protocol, which is
Proactive routing protocols (PRP) use tables to designed for multi hop ad-hoc networks [29]. This
store the information of connected nodes. These is a source demanding routing protocol and the
tables are updated periodically or if there is a need source node stores the complete hop-by-hop route
(such as the network topology changes). Each to the destination node. Therefore, the data packets
node shares its routing table with its neighbors to should carry the complete list of nodes that it has
update their routing tables. This update does not to traverse. If a link is broken, then the source
regard the network load/size or bandwidth node is notified with an error message, and a new
constraints. Therefore, it brings additional burden route discovery phase is started. This routing
to the network. Two main protocols are widely protocol is implemented by Brown et al. in [30]
used in VANETs: optimized link state routing and they were reported that finding a new route in
(OLSR) and destination-sequenced distance vector UAV network with DSR can be irritating.
(DSDV). Ad-hoc on-demand Distance Vector (AODV)
Optimized Link State Routing (OLSR) is a has same on demand characteristics with DSR
proactive link-state routing protocol [27]. It uses with different maintaining mechanisms of routing
two types of messages (hello and topology control table [31]. It uses typical routing tables (caches),
messages) to discover the neighbors. OLSR which contain one record for each destination.
periodically floods topology data over the network This table structure is different from DSR, which
to make sure that each node is synchronized with stores multiple entries in the routing table for each
link state information. Therefore, for each destination. AODV routing protocol consists of
destination node, route is available before three phases: discovering routes, transmitting
transferring the packets. Topological changes packets and maintaining the route. If the source
cause the flooding of network information to each node has packets to be sent, it first starts a route
node. To reduce the communication overhead, discovery process and then dispatch these packets
OLSR uses Multipoint Relays (MPR) that forward over this determined route. Discovery process
broadcast messages during flooding process.
938
enables determined routes without a loop, and it performance constraints like delay, bandwidth,
uses a specific number (called as sequence jitter, packet loss, etc. Due to the high mobility
number) to ensure the usage of fresh routes. Due and distributed structure of this ad-hoc network,
to the mobility of the nodes, some nodes can be defining a comprehensive framework for QoS
out of the communication range. This connection support is an important technical challenge to
loss triggers a repairing process of the broken overcome.
route. VI. CONCLUSION
V. OPEN ISSUES AND CHALLENGES While the future of Unmanned Aerial System is
The researches over this type of highly mobile promising, the lack of networking standards is a
networking do not include all the necessary facts fundamental gap. This type of mobile ad-hoc
and details. Although there are some researches to networks (FANETs), which use UAVs as mobile
support effective and efficient communication nodes, requires scalable, reliable, real-time peer-
between UAVs, there are still many research to-peer mobile ad-hoc networking between UAVs
topics that should be explored in the future works and ground stations. The communication
as follows: requirements of UAVs differs significantly from
traditional networking assumptions, Mobile Ad-
1) National Regulations: Perhaps the biggest Hoc Networks and Vehicular Ad-Hoc Networks in
current barrier to the development of UASs in terms of connectivity, data delivery, latency,
civilian areas stems from the integration of UAVs service and etc. In this article, it is surveyed the
into the each country’s national airspace system. researches in UAV networking and related issues.
There is a serious need for the creation of an It is aimed to encourage the researchers into the
information management system between air problems on FANETs and motivate them to find
traffic management users and the UAS developers. solutions for the open research issues as detailed in
This management system should enable not only 4 the paper.
dimensional navigation but also alternative
separation procedures from manned planes. REFERENCES
2) Routing: Due to the highly mobile and [1] F. Jiang, A.L. Swindlehurst, "Dynamic UAV
dynamic structure of FANETs with highly mobile relay positioning for the ground-to-air uplink,"
nodes, previous routing algorithms are not much IEEE GLOBECOM Workshops, 2010, pp.1766-
1770, 2010.
appropriate for this type networks. Therefore, [2] Bow-Nan Cheng; Moore, S., "A comparison of
developing new routing algorithms is still an open MANET routing protocols on airborne tactical
issue for constructing a flexible and responsive networks," Military Communications Conference-
integration model. MILCOM 2012, pp.1-6, 2012.
3) Path Planning: Cooperation between UAVs [3] E.W. Frew, T.X. Brown, "Airborne
is not just desirable; it is crucial for developing Communication Networks for Small Unmanned
multi-UAV systems in large-scale theatres. There Aircraft Systems," Proceedings of the IEEE,
are some possible changes at UAV’s cost vol.96, no.12, pp.2008-2027, 2008.
estimates or in the mission environment like [4] R. Shirani, M. St-Hilaire Kunz, T.; Yifeng Zhou,
addition/removal of UAVs and physical obstacles. Jun Li, L. Lamont, "Combined Reactive-
In this case, for each UAV new flying paths Geographic routing for Unmanned Aeronautical
should be re-assigned across the fleet. Thus, new Ad-hoc Networks", 8th International Wireless
methods in path planning are required to Communications and Mobile Computing
coordinate the fleets of the UAVs. Conference (IWCMC- 2012), pp.820-826, 2012.
[5] Y. Li, M. St-Hilaire, T. Kunz, "Enhancements to
4) Quality of Service (QoS): This type of Reduce the Overhead of the Reactive-Greedy-
networks are used for transporting some Reactive Routing Protocol for Unmanned
applications' data, which can include simple Aeronautical Ad-Hoc Networks", 8th
messages, video or delay-sensitive data such as International Conference on Wireless
real-time voice. FANET must enable some service Communications, Networking and Mobile
qualities to satisfy a set of predetermined service Computing (WiCOM), pp.1-4, 2012.

939
[6] Y. Cai, F.R. Yu, J. Li, Y. Zhou, L. Lamont, Applications, Lecture Notes in Electrical
"Medium Access Control for Unmanned Aerial Engineering 214, pp. 11-19, 2013.
Vehicle (UAV) Ad-Hoc Networks With Full- [16] A. Cho, J. Kim, S. Lee, C. Kee, "Wind Estimation
Duplex Radios and Multipacket Reception and Airspeed Calibration using a UAV with a
Capability," IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Single-Antenna GPS Receiver and Pitot Tube",
Technology, vol.62, no.1, pp.390-394, 2013. IEEE Transactions on Aerospace and Electronic
[7] P Y. Tuchelmann, "Context-Aware QoS Systems, vol.47, no.1, pp.109-117, 2011.
Control for Wireless Mesh Networks of UAVs", [17] H. Xiang, L. Tian, “Development of a low-cost
International Conference Computer agricultural remote sensing system based on an
Communications and Networks (ICCCN), pp.1,6, autonomous unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV),
2011. Biosystems Engineering”, vol. 108, no. 2, pp.
[8] Y. Li, M. St-Hilaire, T. Kunz, "Improving routing 174-190, 2011.
in networks of UAVs via scoped flooding and [18] J. Clapper, J. Young, J. Cartwright, and J.
mobility prediction", IFIP Wireless Days (WD), Grimes “Unmanned Systems Roadmap 2007-
pp.1-6, 2012. 2032 ” Tech. Rep., Dept. of Defense, 2007.
[9] S. Rohde, N. Goddemeier, K. Daniel, C. Wietfeld, [19] M.T. Hyland, “Performance evaluation of ad hoc
"Link quality dependent mobility strategies for routing protocols in a swarm of autonomous
distributed aerial sensor networks," GLOBECOM unmanned aerial vehicles”, PhD Thesis, Air Force
Workshops, pp.1783-1787, 2010. Institute of Technology, 2007.
[10] I. Bekmezci, O.K. Sahingoz, S. Temel, “Flying [20] D.L. Gu, G. Pei, H. Ly, M. Gerla, B. Zhang, X.
Ad-Hoc Networks (FANETs): A Survey”, Ad Hong, "UAV Aided Intelligent Routing for Ad-
Hoc Networks, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 1254-1270, Hoc Wireless Network in Single-Area Theater",
2013. IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking
[11] C. Barrado, R. Messeguer, J. Lopez, E. Pastor, E. Conference, WCNC. 2000, vol.3, pp.1220-1225,
Santamaria, P. Royo, "Wildfire Monitoring Using 2000.
a Mixed Air-Ground Mobile Network," IEEE [21] C.M. Cheng, P.H. Hsiao, H.T. Kung, and D.
Pervasive Computing, vol.9, no.4, pp.24-32, Vlah “Maximizing throughput of UAV-relaying
2010. networks with the load-carry-and-deliver
[12] J.J. Cione, E.W. Uhlhorn, G. Cascella, S.J. paradigm ” IEEE Wireless Communications and
Majumdar, C. Sisko, N. Carrasco, M.D. Powell, Networking Conference (WCNC 2007), 2007.
P. Bale, G. Holland, P. Turlington, D. Fowler, [22] M. Le, J.S. Park, M. Gerla, "UAV Assisted
C W Landsea and C L Yuhas “The first Disruption Tolerant Routing", Military
successful unmanned aerial system (UAS) Communications Conference, MILCOM 2006,
mission into a tropical cyclone (ophelia 2005) ” in pp.1-5, 2006.
Proc. AMS 12th Conf. IOAS-AOLS, pp. 25–30, [23] G.B. Lamont, J.N. Slear, K. Melendez, "UAV
2008. IEEE Symposium on Swarm Mission Planning
[13] E. Fiorelli, N. Leonard, P. Bhatta, D. Paley, R. and Routing using Multi-Objective Evolutionary
achmayer and D Fratantoni “Multi-AUV Algorithms", Computational Intelligence in
control and adaptive sampling in Monterey bay ” Multicriteria Decision Making, pp.10-20, 2007.
IEEE Journal Oceanic Eng., vol. 31, no. 4, pp. [24] Z. Sun, P. Wang, M.C. Vuran, M.A. Al-Rodhaan,
935–948, 2006. A.M. Al-Dhelaan, I.F. Akyildiz, “BorderSense:
[14] E.P. de Freitas, T. Heimfarth, I.F. Netto, C.E. Border patrol through advanced wireless sensor
Lino, C.E. Pereira, A.M. Ferreira, F.R. Wagner, networks”, Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 9, no. 3,
T. Larsson, "UAV relay network to support WSN pp.468-477, 2011.
connectivity," 2010 International Congress on [25] J. Ko, A. Mahajan, R Sengupta “A Network-
Ultra Modern Telecommunications and Control Centric UAV Organization for Search and Pursuit
Systems and Workshops (ICUMT), pp. 309-314, Operations” IEEE Aerospace Conference, 2002.
2010. [26] J: López P. Royo, E. Pastor, C. Barrado, and E.
[15] O.K. Sahingoz, “Multi-Level Dynamic Key Santamaria, “A middleware architecture for
Management for Scalable Wireless Sensor unmanned aircraft avionics” ACM/IFIP/
Networks with UAV”, The 7th International USENIX International conference on Middleware
Conference on Ubiquitous Information companion (MC '07) 2007.
TEchnologies & Applications (CUTE 2012), [27] T. Clausen,P. Jacquet, “Optimized Link State
Ubiquitous Information Technologies and Routing Protocol (OLSR) RFC 3626” 2003.
940
Available online: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3626
(accessed on May 2013).
[28] C.E. Perkins and P. Bhagwat “Highly dynamic
Destination-Sequenced Distance-Vector routing
(DSDV) for mobile computers” In Proceedings
of the conference on Communications
architectures, protocols and applications
(SIGCOMM '94), pp. 234-244, 1994.
[29] D.B. Johnson and D.A. Maltz, “Dynamic Source
Routing in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks” In
Mobile Computing chapter 5, pp. 153–181.
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996.
[30] T. X. Brown, B. Argrow, C. Dixon, S. Doshi, R.
G The e unel and D Hen el “Ad hoc UAV
ground networ (AUGNet) ” 3rd AIAA
Unmanned Unlimited Technical Conference, pp.
29–39, 2004.
[31] S. Murthy and J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, “An
efficient routing protocol for wireless networks”
ACM Mobile Networks and Applications, pp.
183-197, 1996.

941

You might also like