GPSR: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless Networks

From: Susumu Harada (harada@cs.washington.edu)
Date: Mon Nov 22 2004 - 00:59:34 PST

  • Next message: Seth Cooper: "Review of "GPSR: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless Networks""

    "GPSR: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless Networks"
    B. Karp and H.T. Kung

    In this paper, the authors present a routing solution for dynamic wireless
    networks where each router can possibly be mobile, providing a scalable
    method for determining the path between a sending node and a receiving
    node. Their method, called Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing (GPSR),
    assumes that each router in a wireless network posses knowledge of their
    position as they roam about the physical space and bases their decision of
    where to route a packet on the relative location of their neighboring
    nodes to the destination. The algorithm operates in two phases where the
    first phase attempts to route the packet as geographically close to the
    destination as possible, and when that gets stuck, switches to a perimeter
    routing scheme whereby an attempt is made to route around a geographic
    "void" where there are no routers closer to the destination.

    I thought the way in which they encapsulated the routing decision by
    adopting a geography based policy in which each router tries to perform an
    intelligent hill climbing was very attractive. Since the routers only
    have to maintain information about their neighbors, it is significantly
    more efficient and flexible than link state and distance vector protocols.
    Their ability to piggyback the location data on top of data packets as
    well as their proactive beaconing also reduces the routing protocol
    traffic overhead significantly.

    There were several issues that stuck out as I read the paper. First is
    their series of assumptions about the nature of the wireless network.
    They assume that each wireless router can be characterized as having equal
    and uniform coverage radius. In reality, this will not be the case as
    buildings may obstruct certain paths and also each router will have
    varying coverage areas. How will their perimeter algorithm work under
    these conditions? Also, they seem to assume a model under which all the
    wireless routers are mobile. In reality, it seems more to be the case
    that the wireless routers are mostly stationary, and the mobile clients
    (not participating in routing) are the ones that are highly mobile. Given
    this scenario, I wonder how relevant their approach is in addressing such
    situations. Finally, it is not clear how realistic it is to require all
    mobile routers to be aware of their physical location. As power is a
    scarce resource for mobile systems, it is not clear how feasible it is to
    require them to equip themselves with GPS devices. Also, how well such
    methods translate to indoor settings or other places where accurate
    location information is unavailable is also unclear.


  • Next message: Seth Cooper: "Review of "GPSR: Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing for Wireless Networks""

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Mon Nov 22 2004 - 00:59:34 PST