Several distributed routing algorithms for wireless networks were described recently, based on location information of nodes available via Global Positioning System (GPS). In GEDIR algorithm (shown to have close performance to the shortest path algorithm, if successful), sender or each node currently holding the message m forwards m to one of its neighbors which is closest to destination. FACE algorithm guarantees the delivery of m if the network, modeled by unit graph, is connected. GFG algorithm combines GEDIR and FACE algorithm. GEDIR algorithm is applied as long as possible, until delivery or a failure. In case of failure, the algorithm switches to FACE algorithm until a node closer to destination than last failure node is found, at which point GEDIR is applied again. In this paper we further improve the performance of GFG algorithm, by reducing its average hop count. Each node in the network is classified as internal or not, based on geographic position of its neighboring nodes. The network of internal nodes define a dominating set, i.e. it must be connected, and each node must be either internal or directly connected to an internal node. We apply several possible definitions of internal nodes, namely the concept of intermediate and gateway nodes from literature, and propose to apply shortest path length between two nodes at distance 2 as additional criterion for internal nodes. A node A is an intermediate node if there exist two neighboring nodes B and C such that A is on a shortest path (in terms of hop count) between them (i.e. these two neighbors are not directly connected). The number of intermediate nodes can be reduced by introducing a secondary measure of a path length. Routing is performed on the dominating set, except possibly the first and last hops. We propose to run GEDIR algorithm on the dominating set, resorting to FACE algorithm whenever GEDIR fails. The performance of proposed algorithms that restricts GFG to internal nodes is also measured in this paper, by comparing its average hop count with hop count of the benchmark shortest path algorithm.
[1]
Nitin H. Vaidya,et al.
Location-aided routing (LAR) in mobile ad hoc networks
,
1998,
MobiCom '98.
[2]
Ivan Stojmenovic,et al.
Routing with Guaranteed Delivery in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks
,
1999,
DIALM '99.
[3]
Chai-Keong Toh,et al.
Associativity-Based Routing for Ad Hoc Mobile Networks
,
1997,
Wirel. Pers. Commun..
[4]
Dhiraj K. Pradhan,et al.
A cluster-based approach for routing in dynamic networks
,
1997,
CCRV.
[5]
S. M. Heemstra de Groot,et al.
Power-aware routing in mobile ad hoc networks
,
1998,
MobiCom '98.
[6]
Tomasz Imielinski,et al.
GeoCast—geographic addressing and routing
,
1997,
MobiCom '97.
[7]
David A. Maltz,et al.
A performance comparison of multi-hop wireless ad hoc network routing protocols
,
1998,
MobiCom '98.
[8]
Leonard Kleinrock,et al.
Optimal Transmission Ranges for Randomly Distributed Packet Radio Terminals
,
1984,
IEEE Trans. Commun..
[9]
Imrich Chlamtac,et al.
Dynamic source routing for ad hoc networks using the global positioning system
,
1999,
WCNC. 1999 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (Cat. No.99TH8466).
[10]
Michael J. Rycroft,et al.
Understanding GPS. Principles and Applications
,
1997
.
[11]
Jorge Urrutia,et al.
Compass routing on geometric networks
,
1999,
CCCG.
[12]
S. Ramanathan,et al.
A survey of routing techniques for mobile communications networks
,
1996,
Mob. Networks Appl..