ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Forwarding in opportunistic networks with resource constraints
Full text PdfPdf (371 KB)
Source
International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking archive
Proceedings of the third ACM workshop on Challenged networks table of contents
San Francisco, California, USA
SESSION: Routing table of contents
Pages 41-48  
Year of Publication: 2008
ISBN:978-1-60558-186-6
Authors
Vijay Erramilli  Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
Mark Crovella  Boston University, Boston, MA, USA
Sponsors
SIGMOBILE: ACM Special Interest Group on Mobility of Systems, Users, Data and Computing
ACM: Association for Computing Machinery
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 12,   Downloads (12 Months): 134,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1409985.1409994
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

Effective forwarding in mobile opportunistic networks is a challenge, given the unpredictable mobility of nodes, short contact durations between nodes, wireless interference and limited buffer sizes.

Most forwarding algorithms aim at decreasing costs (relative to flooding the network) by forwarding only to nodes which are likely to be good relays. While it is non-trivial to decide if an encountered node is a good relay or not at the moment of encounter, it is harder still to prioritize which messages to transmit under the presence of short contact durations and which messages to drop when buffers become full.

The main objective of this paper is to study different message prioritization schemes using real measurements. Such schemes can be broadly divided into two categories - schemes which do not use any network information, and schemes which do. Examples of the former set of schemes include FIFO/LIFO etc. For the latter set of schemes, there is a key design choice: On one hand, we have the following scheme: when a forwarding opportunity presents itself, assign high priorities to messages which are relatively close to their intended destination. On the other hand, we can assign high priorities to messages which are farther away from their destination than closer messages. In order to decide if messages are close to their destination or not, we have to rely on a forwarding algorithm. For this, we use delegation forwarding schemes which have been shown to be efficient in terms of cost incurred in the network. We develop a new set of prioritization schemes based on delegation schemes. We consider these schemes in our empirical study.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
 
2
BURGESS, J., GALLAGHER, B., JENSEN, D., AND LEVINE, B. N. MaxProp: Routing for Vehicle-Based Disruption-Tolerant Networks. In Proc. IEEE INFOCOM (April 2006).
 
3
4
 
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
 
16
SARAFIJANOVIC-DJUKIC, N., PIDRKOWSKI, M., AND GROSSGLAUSER, M. Island hopping: Efficient mobility assisted forwarding in partitioned networks. In IEEE SECON'06 (Reston, VA, USA).
 
17
SPYROPOULOS, T., PSOUNIS, K., AND RAGHAVENDRA, C. Efficient routing in intermittently connected mobile networks: The multi copy case. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 2, 2 (2008), 477--486.
 
18
VAHDAT, A., AND BECKER, D. Epidemic Routing for Partially Connected Ad Hoc Networks. Tech. Rep. CS-200006, Duke University, 2000.

Collaborative Colleagues:
Vijay Erramilli: colleagues
Mark Crovella: colleagues