UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF

ENGINEERING
COMPUTER SCIENCE ENGINEERING
Bachelor of Engineering (Computer Science & Engineering)
Subject Name: Internet of Things
Subject Code: CSY-313

Design Issues and Quality of Service DISCOVER . LEARN . EMPOWER

 Internet Of Things
Course Outcome
greedy
CO Title Level
Number
fails
CO1 An attribute of IOT is dependent on computer network. Understand Greedy Forwarding Perimeter Forwarding
Analyzing the extent to which IOT devices can be
expected to evolve in coming years.
CO2 IoT creates new platform opportunities for the Understand
innovators ready to build them. Understand of new
opportunities and innovation in the new emerging
Internet of Things.
CO3 For understanding the concept to ensure competition Understand have left local
and innovation dissemination on all IoT market greedy maxima greedy
segments, for allowing new isolated players and small- works fails
scale structures to propose and disseminate innovations
on a large scale, for promoting innovation via new
business models.

2
 • Study of existing IoT platforms
/middleware:IoT- A, Hydra, OpenIOT,
Carrot, Xively Etc
• Key IoT Technologies: Device Intelligence,
Syllabus for unit 3 Communication Capabilities, Mobility
Support, Device Power, Design factors, The
design issues & challenges

In unit 3- Students will learn about various

IOT technologies and study existing IOT
platforms.

3
Location Based Routing

4
Overview

• Sensor nodes are addressed by means of their locations.

• The distance between neighboring nodes can be estimated on the basis of incoming
signal strengths.
• Relative coordinates of neighboring nodes can be obtained by exchanging such
information between neighbors.
• To save energy, some location based schemes demand that nodes should
go to sleep if there is no activity.
• More energy savings can be obtained by having as many sleeping nodes in
the network as possible.
• Hereby, two important location based routing protocols, GEAR and GPSR,
are introduced.
• Geographical and Energy Aware Routing (GEAR)
• Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR)

5
 GEAR
Geographical and Energy Aware Routing

6
Geographical and Energy Aware Routing (GEAR)

• The protocol, called Geographic and Energy Aware Routing (GEAR), uses
energy aware and geographically-informed neighbor selection heuristics
to route a packet towards the destination region.
• The key idea is to restrict the number of interests in directed diffusion by
only considering a certain region rather than sending the interests to the
whole network. By doing this, GEAR can conserve more energy than
directed diffusion.
• The basic concept comprises of two main parts
• Route packets towards a target region through geographical and energy aware
neighbor selection
• Disseminate the packet within the region

7
Energy Aware Neighbor Computation
• Each node N maintains state h(N, R) which is called learned cost to
region R, where R is the target region
• Each node infrequently updates neighbor of its cost
• When a node wants to send a packet, it checks the learned cost to that
region of all its neighbors
• If a node does not have the learned cost of a neighbor to a region, the
estimated cost is computed as follows:
c(Ni, R) = αd(Ni, R) + (1-α)e(Ni)
where
α = tunable weight, from 0 to 1.
d(Ni, R) = normalized the largest distance among neighbors of N
e(Ni) = normalized the largest consumed energy among neighbors of N

8
Energy Aware Neighbor Computation (cont.)
• When a node wants to forward a packet to a destination, it checks to see
if it has any neighbor closer to destination than itself
• In case of multiple choices, it aims to minimize the learned cost h(Nmin, R)
• It then sets its own cost to:
h(N, R) = h(Nmin, R) + c(N, Nmin)
c(N, Nmin) = the transmission cost from N and Nmin

9
Forwarding Around Holes

K L T

B–T= 5
C–T=2
F G xH I J

h(C,T) = h(B,T)+c(C,B)
5
A B C D E

α is set to 1. Initially, at time 0, at node S, among all neighbors of S, B, C, D

are closer to T than S. h(B,T)=c(B,T)= , h(C,T)=c(C,T)=2, h(D,T)=c(D,T)=
5 . After that , h(C, T) = h(B, T) + 1 5

10
Recursive Geographic Forwarding

• Once the target region is reached, the packets are disseminated

within the region by recursive geographic forwarding
• Forwarding stops when a node is the only one in a sub-region

Ni

11
 Recursive Geographic Forwarding (cont.) Proposed solution for
pathologies
• Solution:
• Node degree is used as a criteria to differentiate low density networks
from high density ones
• Choice of restricted flooding over recursive geographic forwarding if the
receiver’s node degree is below a threshold value

12
 GPSR
Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing

13
Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR)
• Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR) proposes the aggressive use
of geography to achieve scalability
• GEAR was compared to a similar non-energy-aware routing protocol
GPSR, which is one of the earlier works in geographic routing that uses
planar graphs to solve the problem of holes
• In case of GPSR, the packets follow the perimeter of the planar graph to
find their routes
• Although the GPSR approach reduces the number of states a node
should keep, it has been designed for general mobile ad hoc networks
and requires a location service to map locations and node identifiers.

14
Algorithm & Example

• The algorithm consists of two methods:

greedy forwarding + perimeter forwarding

• Greedy forwarding, which is used wherever possible, and perimeter

forwarding, which is used in the regions greedy forwarding cannot be
done.

15
The Right-Hand Rule: Perimeters
• In previous works, use the right-hand rule to map perimeters by sending
packets on tours of them. The state accumulated in these packets is
cached by nodes, which recover from local maxima in greedy forwarding
by routing to a node on a cached perimeter closer to the destination.
• This approach requires a heuristic, the no-crossing heuristic, to force the
right-hand rule to find perimeters that enclose voids in regions where
edges of the graph cross

x z

16
y
Right-Hand Rule Does Not Work with Cross Edges

u
D

 x originates a packet to u
w
 Right-hand rule results in the tour x-u-z-w-
u-x
x

17
Remove Crossing Edge

u
v

w
Make the graph planar
Remove (w,z) from the graph
x
 Right-hand rule results in the tour
x-u-z-v-x

18
Make a Graph Planar
• A graph in which no two edges cross is known as planar. A set of nodes
with radios, where all radios have identical, circular radio range r, can be
seen as a graph: each node is a vertex, and edge (n, m) exists between
nodes n and m if the distance between n and m, d(n, m)≦r.
• 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)

19
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

u
v

20
 Planarized Graphs (cont.)
Relative Neighborhood Graph
Original Gabriel Graph (GG) (RNG)

The full graph of a radio network, 200 nodes,

The GG subset of the full The RNG subset of the full and GG
uniformly randomly placed on a 2000 x 2000
graph graphs.
meter region, with a radio range of 250 m.

21
Combining Greedy and Planar Perimeters
• All data packets are marked initially at their originators as greedy mode
• GPSR packet headers include a flag field indicating whether the packet is
in greedy mode or perimeter mode
• Packet sources also include the geographic location of the destination in
packets
• Only a packet’s source sets the location destination field, it is left
unchanged as the packet is forwarded through the network
• Upon receiving a greedy-mode packet for forwarding, a node searches its
neighbor table for the neighbor geographically closest to the packet’s
destination
• When no neighbor is closer, the node marks the packet into perimeter
mode
22
QoS Based Routing

23
Overview

• QoS is the performance level of service offered by a network to the

user.
• The goal of QoS is to achieve a more deterministic network behavior
so that the information carried by the network can be better
delivered and the resources can be better utilized.
• In QoS-based routing protocols, the network has to balance between
energy consumption and data quality.
• In particular, the network has to satisfy certain QoS metrics, e.g.,
delay, energy, bandwidth, etc. when delivering data to the BS.

24
Parameters of QoS Networks

• Different services require different QoS parameters

• Multimedia
• Bandwidth, delay jitter & delay
• Emergency services
• Network availability
• Group communications
• Battery life
• Generally the parameters that are important are:
• bandwidth
• delay jitter
• battery charge
• processing power
• buffer space

25
Challenges in QoS Routing

• Dynamically varying network topology

• Imprecise state information
• Lack of central coordination
• Hidden node problem
• Limited resource
• Insecure medium

26
TBP (Ticket-Based Probing)
QoS of Bandwidth

27
Ticket-Based Probing
• Distributed multi path QoS routing scheme
• Bandwidth-constrained routing and delay-constrained routing
• There are numerous paths from source to destination, we shall not
randomly pick several paths to search
• We shall not use any flooding path-discovery approaches, which may send
routing messages to the entire network
• Multipath search is tolerant to imprecise information
• We want to make an intelligent hop-by-hop path selection to guide the
search along the best candidate paths

28
Ticket-Based Probing (cont.)
• A ticket is the permission to search one path. The source node issues a
number of tickets based on the available state information
• Utilizes tickets to limit the number of paths searched during route
discovery
• A ticket is the permission to search a single path
• More tickets, more QoS constraints are required
• Probes (routing messages) are sent from the source toward the
destination to search for a low-cost path that satisfies the QoS
requirement
• Each probe is required to carry at least one ticket

29
Conclusion
• The routing overhead is controlled by the number of tickets, which
allows the dynamic tradeoff between the overhead and the routing
performance. Issuing more tickets means searching more paths, which
results in a better chance of finding a feasible path at the cost of higher
overhead.
• A distributed routing process is used to avoid any centralized path
computation that could be very expensive for QoS routing in large
networks.
• This approach not only increases the chance of success but also
improves the ability to tolerate the information imprecision because the
intermediate nodes may gradually correct a wrong decision made by the
source.

30
 Conclusion (cont.)
• Ticket-based probing scheme achieves a balance between the single-
path routing algorithms and the flooding algorithms. It does multipath
routing without flooding.
• The basic idea is to achieve a near-optimal performance with modest
overhead by using a limited number of tickets and making intelligent
hop-by- hop path selection.

31
FAQs
• What are the design issue of IOT
• What are the security challenges of IOT
• How network is form in IOT
 REFERENCES
• S. Chen and K. Nahrstedt, “On finding multi-constrained paths,” in Proc. IEEE ICC’98, pp. 874-879.
• R. Guerin and A. Orda, “QoS-based routing in networks with inaccurate information: Theory and algorithms,” in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM’97, Japan, pp. 75-83.
• Q. Ma and P. Steenkiste, “Quality-of-service routing with performance guarantees,” in Proc. 4th Int. IFIP Workshop Quality of Service, May 1997, pp. 115-126.
• Z. Wang and J. Crowcroft, “QoS routing for supporting resource reservation,” IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., Sept. 1996.
• S. Chen and K Nahrstedt, “Distributed Quality-of-Service Routing in Ad Hoc Networks,” IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun, vol.17, no. 8, pp. 1488-1505, Aug. 1999.
• T. Hea, J. A Stankovic, C. Lu, and T. Abdelzaher, “SPEED: a stateless protocol for real-time communication in sensor networks,” in Proc. IEEE International Conference on
Distributed Computing Systems, pp. 46-55, May 2003.
• G. S. Ahn, A. T. Campbell, A. Veres, and L.H. Sun. “SWAN: Service Differentiation in Stateless Wireless Ad Hoc Networks,” In Proc. IEEE INFOCOM'2002, June 2002.
• https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11277-016-3842-3
• B. Karp and H. T. Kung, “Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless Networks”, Proc. 6th Annual ACM/IEEE Int'l. Conf. Mobile Comp. Net., Boston, MA, pp. 243-54,
August 2000.
• G. G. Finn, “Routing and addressing problems in large metropolitan-scale internetworks”, Tech. Rep. ISI/RR-87-180, Information Sciences Institute, March 1987.
• S. Floyd and V. Jacoboson, “The synchronization of periodic routing messages”, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Vol. 2, pp. 122-136, April 1994.
• B. Karp “Greedy perimeter state routing”, Invited Seminar at the USC/Information Sciences Institute, July 1998.
• J. Saltzer, D. P. Reed, and D. Clark, “End-to-end arguments in system design”, ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, Vol. 2, No. 4, Pages: 277-288, November 1984.

33
 THANK YOU

For queries
Email: csy_313_2019@gmail.com