A Novel Virtual Tunneling Protocol for
Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks
Abstract. The Wireless Sensor Networks are prime components in
automation and helps in accelerating the technology to the next level. The sensor
nodes are deployed in adverse conditions to monitor and collect critical data around
the environment and relay the same to the server sensor node. The Underwater Wireless
Sensor Networks (UWSNs) are prone to high danger and are designed to withstand extreme
climate conditions. The UWSNs performance is evaluated by the metrics low
energy consumption, high Packet Delivery Rate (PDR), low Jitter and shortest
path in transmitting the sensed data to the Server Sensor Node (SSN). In this
paper we have proposed a Virtual Tunneling Protocol (VTP) to increase the
aforementioned factors associated with the Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks.
The simulation yielded good results and the same has been recorded here.
Keywords: virtual tunneling protocol, wireless sensor networks,
underwater, data transmission.
1. Introduction
The
integrity among the sensor nodes is important aligning the network. The power
consumption of the sensor nodes can be reduced with the help of node
synchronization, Gowrishankar et al (2008). The clustering technique keeps the
sensor nodes linked to one another and reduces the routing overhead and also
helps in increasing the average life of the network, JaydipSen (2009). When all
the sensor nodes are synchronized, aligned and clustered in the network, then
such network is safe and secure with minimal infusion of attack packets. This
external injection of attack packets is the main cause of traffic congestion, Poonam
Khare & Sara Ali (2014). The key
points to be noted in Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks setup are power consumption,
self-configuration, reliability and channel utilization, Reshma Jayesh Rasal et
al (2015). The key issues associated in maintaining the topology of the sensor
networks are power control and power management, Debasmita Sengupta & Alak
Roy (2014). There are different types of
contacts established between sensor nodes and server sensor node for
transmitting the sensed data. They are scheduled and unscheduled contact and unscheduled
is divided into predicted and opportunistic contacts. The metrics average
end-to-end delay, packet delivery ratio and energy consumption are critical
parameters in evaluating the performance of the Underwater Wireless Sensor
Networks. The scheduled schemes show good performance for UWSNs with a
higher cost for base station planning.
Opportunistic and unscheduled contacts are used in partially known and
unknown environments respectively, Hsin-Hung Cho et
al (2014). The tree topology is
commonly used to set the shortest path to each sink node and for dynamic balancing
of the load among sink nodes, Le et al (2007). The two major energy consuming
operations are sending and receiving of messages, Y. Wu et al (2008). Energyconsumption
is the primary cause of the performance of the sensor networks. The topology control
techniques must lower the energy exhaustion rate of the sensor nodes, Dijun et
al (2011).The load between mesh routers could be shared to distribute the load
evenly in a mesh topology, Riggio et al (2011). Theclustering of the nodes
within the grid and dynamic selection of cluster head reduces the energy
dissipation and extends the life time of thesensor nodes, Wei et al (2010). The
preservation of topology and energy consumption of the UWSNs has been
highlighted in the survey by Shamneesh
Sharma et al (2013). The performance of various energy efficient and cluster
based routing schemes in the wireless sensor networks is studied, Shahrzad et
al (2015).
2. Related Work
Mohsen Taherian et al (2015) proposed an optimal and
secured routing protocol for the wireless sensor networks using the Particle
Swarm Intelligence (PSI) algorithm. The main focus on the work was to find a
safe, efficient and secure routing scheme for the wireless sensor networks
using the clustering algorithm and PSO. Behrang Barekatain et al (2015)
proposed a new combination of Improved Genetic Algorithm (IGA) and K-means
algorithm. The proposed work claimed to improve the energy consumption of the
sensor nodes and thereby increased the life time of the sensor network. Mininath
Nighot & Ashok Ghatol (2016) proposed a GPS based Distributed Communication
Protocol (GDCP) for Static Wireless Sensor Networks (SWSN). In this method a Neighboring
Table (NT) is maintained by the sensor nodes. This table is used to store data
such as location, distance to the neighbor node
and distance to the server sensor node. The neighbor node to become the next
hop node it should satisfy two parameters namely high remaining energy and lowest
distance to the server sensor node. Rakhee & Srinivas (2016) demonstrated a
new technique by combining Ant Colony Optimization (ACO) and Breadth First
Search (BFS). In this method the choice of cluster head is made level by level
and on rotation basis to make sure that the connectivity is not lost between nodes.
Amutha et al (2015) proposed an
ECOSENSE protocol for the wireless sensor networks. It was claimed to be the
energy efficient routing protocol. The work compared S-MAC with ECOSENSE and
proved to be fruitful in terms of latency and energy saving. S-MAC operates on
duty cycle and TRaffic Adaptive Medium Access (TRAMA) operates on load
balancing. ECOSENSE used both duty cycle and load balancing. Jaibheem et
al (2015) came up with the new routing protocol for Underwater
Wireless Sensor Networks (UWSNs) using the Multi-Layered Routing Protocol (MRP) strategy. Many existing routing
protocols make use of the sensor nodes localization. This Multi-Layered Routing
Protocol (MRP) utilized super sensor nodes to eliminate the necessity of
localization. Sheeraz Ahmed et al (2015) proposed a
routing protocol for improving the performance of the network
stability and packet delivery ratio in UWSNs. Ayesha Hussain Khan et al (2015) experimented
their idea of sinks moves towards the densest
region of the network in terms of the number of sensor nodes. Naveed Ilyas et
al (2015) proposed an AUV-aided Efficient Data Gathering (AEDG) Routing
Protocol. In this method an Autonomous Underwater Vehicle (AUV) collected the sensed
data from the sensor nodes. The Shortest Path Tree (SPT) algorithm was used to save
the energy of the sensor nodes. Naveed Ilyas et al (2015) proposed another
data gathering and routing protocol. Over the years Autonomous
Vehicles are used underwater to collect the data from the by the sensor nodes. Abhishek
Joshi et al (2016) implemented a protocol stack for a three dimensional
Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs). This paper, presented terrestrial
three-dimensional network architecture and a protocol stack for static sensor
nodes placed at different heights.
3. The Virtual Tunneling Protocol
The Virtual Tunneling
Protocol works in three phases namely the
1.
Selection of
relay nodes
2.
Tunneling of
relay nodes to Base Station
3.
Data
transmission
The
detailed description of all the phases is given below in the following
sections.
3.1 Selection of Relay Nodes
This
is the most crucial phase of the VT protocol. If this phase goes well then
everything is done well with nothing to be wrong. The relay nodes are nodes
which help in transferring the data packets to the server sensor node from the client
sensor node. These intermediate nodes are called the relay nodes. The relay
nodes are selected based on the following criteria
a)
All groups in
the path between the source and base station is selected
b)
A group is
avoided, unless if it is really unnecessary making the path too long.
c)
Border nodes
are given high priority for being the relay nodes, because the connectivity
between these nodes to the border nodes in adjacent group is high
d)
At the maximum
only two nodes are selected from each border in a group. One being the entry
and another being the exit. Rarely more than two nodes are selected from a
group.
e)
Nodes which
have most recently transmitted the sensed data are given more preference. If at
any case, the connection during data transmission is lost, the node which holds
the data at the time of connection is lost is responsible for establishing a
new tunnel from itself to the base station. This is the reason nodes with recent
transmission is selected.
So considering all these
conditions, relay nodes are selected.
3.2 Tunneling of Relay Nodes to Base Station
A strong connection is
established between these relay nodes forming a tunnel like structure from the client
to the server sensor nodes. This tunnel is used to continuously transfer the collected
data from the source sensor node to the server sensor node. It acts like pipe
carrying water. The connection is established just like the TCP three way
handshake.
3.3 Data transmission
In this phase the data to be
transferred from the node to the server sensor node is sent continuously without
any interruption. The figure 1a depicts the three phases of VTP in detail.
Figure
1 a) Selected Relay nodes in group
Figure 1 b) Establishing connection between relay
nodes using 3-way handshake
Figure 1 c) Virtual Tunnel between Relay nodes
The nodes in red inside the
clustered group are the potential candidates for relay nodes, as they are the
border nodes which make connectivity among the group easier. The figure 1b
clearly shows the 3-way handshake connection formation between nodes and figure
1c depicts the creation of virtual tunnel between the nodes.
3.4 VTP Packet Format
0 4
|
8
|
16
|
24
|
32
|
VTP Version
|
URG
|
Source
Address
|
Intermediate
Destination Address
|
Destination
Address
|
No.
Relay_nodes
|
Seq_tunnel
|
No. of bytes
|
||
Reserved
|
||||
TTL
|
||||
Relay_nodes
|
||||
……..
|
||||
……..
|
||||
Data
|
||||
Padding
|
||||
Tail
|
||||
Figure 2 Packet format of VTP
The Virtual Tunneling Protocol has a defined packet
format for communicating between the nodes in the Underwater Wireless Sensor
Networks (UWSNs). This packet format is used for all the three phases VTP for
transmission of data from source sensor node to the server sensor node. The
figure 2 represents the packet format and the explanation of the same is given
following the format.
The VTP version denotes the current version of the
VTP that is being utilized.
The URG bit is set to 1 if the data being sent is
urgent and set to 0 if not urgent.
The source address denotes the address of the sensor
node which originates the packet. It is usually the node which starts the
transmission of the data to the server sensor node.
Destination address is generally the base station.
Intermediate destination address is the next hop
address of the sensor node to which the packet should be forwarded.
No. Relay_nodes denotes the number of relay nodes in
the path from the source to the destination.
The Seq_tunnel denotes the sequence number of the
tunnel being established
No. of bytes denotes the total number of bytes in
the data section.
Reserved is for future use
TTL is a timer usually set to some fixed value after
which expiry the packet is dropped by the nodes.
The list of relay nodes with its complete details
such as address, id and cluster id is given in this section.
The actual data that is being sent from the client sensor
node to the server sensor node is denoted by the data.
Padding denotes the character used to pad between
the relay nodes list section and the actual node. This padding is usually done
to separate the section more visibly. Usually the character * is used for
padding.
Tail
denotes the end of the VTP packet.
4. Metrics
(1)
(2)
Jitter
is the difference in time between the packets received at receiver with respect
to the sender. If Si is the time in which packet i was sent by the
sender and Ri is the time it was received by the receiver, Jitter
sample Ji is given by
(3)
Energy per bit is the total
energy dissipated to send a bit from client to server sensor node.
5. Simulation Results
In this section we
present the simulation results of the Virtual Tunneling Protocol and compare it
with the existing routing protocols in table 1 and fig 3. The experimental
setup in Matlab is done with 100 sensor nodes. Fig 4 represents graphical
representation.
Table 1.Comparison of VTP with other Routing
Protocols
S.No
|
Model
|
PDR*
|
Jitter*
|
RL*
|
1
|
VTP
|
96
|
1.43
|
39
|
2
|
MPR
|
89
|
1.59
|
51
|
3
|
CARP
|
91
|
1.76
|
45
|
4
|
MURAO
|
87
|
2.31
|
63
|
PDR-Packet Delivery Rate (packets per second),
Jitter is in milliseconds, RL-Route Length (number of hops).
Figure 3. Graphical representation of table 1
Table 2. No. of
nodes from source to BS
S.No
|
Method
|
Avg.
no. of nodes from source to BS
|
1.
|
VTP
|
15
|
2.
|
CARP
|
19
|
3.
|
MPR
|
23
|
4.
|
MURAO
|
31
|
Figure
4. Graphical representation of table 2
Conclusion
The Virtual Tunneling Protocol
has showed good results and is visible through the simulation results. The protocol
is tested for PDR, Jitter, Route Length and yielded good results.The future
works include the measuring the performance of the protocol with more
parameters.
References
1. JaydipSen,
A Survey on Wireless Sensor Network Security, International Journal of
Communication Networks and Information Security (IJCNIS), Vol. 1, No. 2, August
2009, pp.55-78.
2. Gowrishankar
S, T.G.Basavaraju, Manjaiah, Subir Kumar Sarkar, Issues in Wireless Sensor
Networks, Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering 2008 Vol I, London,
U.K.
3. PoonamKhare&
Sara Ali, Survey of Wireless Sensor Network Vulnerabilities and its Solution, International Journal of Recent Development
in Engineering and Technology, Volume 2, Issue 6, pp.84-88. 2014.
4. ReshmaJayeshRasal, ShyamraoV.Gumaste, Gajanan S. Deokate, Survey on Different Routing
Issues and Design Challenges in WSN, International
Journal of Scientific Engineering and Applied Science (IJSEAS), Volume 1, Issue
4, pp.189-192. 2015
5.
DebasmitaSengupta&Alak
Roy, A Literature Survey of Topology Control and Its Related Issues in Wireless
Sensor Networks, vol 10, 19-27. 2014.
6.
Hsin-Hung Cho,
Chi-Yuan Chen, Timothy K. Shih, Han-Chieh Chao, Survey on underwater
delay/disruption tolerant wireless sensor network routing, IET Wireless Sensor
Systems, Vol. 4, Iss. 3, pp. 112–121. 2014
7.
Shamneesh
Sharma, Dinesh Kumar and Keshav Kishore, Wireless Sensor Networks- A Review on
Topologies and Node Architecture, International Journal of Computer Sciences
and Engineering Vol.-1(2), pp (19-25) Oct 2013, pp.19-25.
8.
ShahrzadDehghani,
Mohammad Pourzaferani, BehrangBarekatain, Comparison on energy-efficient
cluster based routing algorithms in wireless sensor network, Procedia Computer
Science 72 (2015) 535 – 542.
9.
Mohsen Taherian, HosseinKarimi,
AsmaMoradiKashkooli, AzadehEsfahanimehr, TahereJafta, and Mohammad Jafarabad,
The design of an optimal and secure routing model in wireless sensor networks
by using PSO algorithm, Procedia Computer Science 73 (2015) 468 – 473.
10. BehrangBarekatain,
ShahrzadDehghani,MohammadPourzaferani, An Energy-Aware Routing Protocol for
Wireless Sensor Networks Based on new combination of Genetic Algorithm &
k-means, Procedia Computer Science 72 (2015) 552 – 560
11.
Nighot&Ghatol,
GPS Based Distributed Communication Protocol for Static Sensor Network (GDCP), Procedia
Computer Science, Volume 78, 2016, Pages 530-536.
12.
Rakhee& M.
B. Srinivas, Cluster Based Energy Efficient Routing Protocol Using ANT Colony,
Optimization and Breadth First Search, Procedia Computer Science 89 ( 2016 )
124 – 133.
13.
B.Amutha,BhavaniGhanta, KarthickNanamaran,
ManickavasagamBalasubramanian, ECOSENSE: An Energy Consumption Protocol for
Wireless Sensor Networks, Procedia Computer Science 57 ( 2015 ) 1160 – 1170.
14.
Jaibheem,
MallikarjunGokavi, KailashPatil, Enhanced Routing Protocols ForUwsn Using Mrp
Technology, International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology,
Volume: 04 Special Issue: 05, pp.117-121. 2015.
15.
Sheeraz Ahmed,
Mariam Akbar, RehmatUllah, Samin Ahmed, Atta-ur-Rehman, MohsinRaza, Zahoor Ali
Khan, Umar Qasim, NadeemJavaid, ARCUN: Analytical approach towards Reliability
with Cooperation for Underwater WSNs, Procedia Computer Science 52 (2015) 576 –
583.
16.
Ayesha
HussainKhanaMohsinRazaJafri, NadeemJavaid, Zahoor Ali Khan, Umar Qasim,
Muhammad Imran, DSM: Dynamic Sink Mobility Equipped DBR for
underwater WSNs, Procedia Computer Science 52 ( 2015 ) 560 – 567.
17. NaveedIlyas,
Turki Ali Alghamdi, Muhammad NaumanFarooq, Bilal Mehboob, Abdul HannanSadiq,
Umar NadeemJavaid, "AEDG: AUV-aided Efficient Data Gathering Routing
Protocol for Underwater Wireless Sensor Networks", Procedia Computer Science, vol. 52, pp. 568-575, 2015.
18. NaveedIlyas,
Mariam Akbar, RehmatUllah, Muhammad Khalid, ArsalanArif, Abdul Hafeez, Umar
Qasim, Zahoor Ali Khan, NadeemJavaid, "SEDG: Scalable and Efficient Data
Gathering Routing Protocol for Underwater WSNs", Procedia Computer Science, vol. 52, pp. 584-591, 2015.
19.
Abhishek
Joshi, SarangDhongdi, K. R. Anupama, PritishNahar and RishabhSethunathan,
Implementation of Protocol Stack for Three-Dimensional Wireless Sensor Network,
Procedia Computer Science 89 ( 2016 ) 193 – 202.
20. H.K.Le,
D. Henriksson, T. Abdelzaher,“A control theory approach to throughput
optimization in multi-channel collection sensor networks”, In IPSN, 2007.
21. Y. Wu,
S. Fahmy, N.B. Shroff,“On the construction of a maximum- lifetime data
gathering tree in sensor networks: NP-completeness and approximation
algorithm”, In INFOCOM, 2008.
22. DijunLuo,
Xiaojun Zhu, Xiaobing Wu, Guihai Chen, “Maximizing Lifetime for the Shortest
Path Aggregation Tree in Wireless Sensor Networks”, IEEE Proceedings INFOCOM,
pp. 1566 – 1574, 2011.
23. Riggio,
Roberto, Rasheed, Tinku M., Sicari, Sabrina, “Performance Evaluation of an
Hybrid Mesh and Sensor Network”, IEEE International on Global
Telecommunications, pp. 1–6, 2011.
24.
Wei-dong Liu; Zheng-dong Wang; Shen
Zhang; Qing-qing Wang, “A Low Power Grid-based Cluster Routing Algorithm of
Wireless Sensor Networks”, IEEE International Forum on Information Technology
and Applications (IFITA), Vol. 1, pp. 227 - 229, 2010.
25.
ViswaBharathy,
AM, Basha, AM 2017, ‘A
Multi-Class Classification MCLP Model with Particle Swarm Optimization for
Network Intrusion Detection’, Sadhana: Academy Proceedings in Engineering
Science, vol. 42, no. 5, pp.
631-640.
26.
ViswaBharathy,
AM, Basha, AM 2016, ‘A
Hybrid Intrusion Detection System Cascading Support Vector Machine and Fuzzy
Logic’,
World Applied Sciences Journal, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 104-109.
27.
ViswaBharathy,
AM, Basha, AM 2016, ‘A Hybrid Network Intrusion Detection Technique using
Variable Multiplicative K-Means with Self-Organising PSO’, Middle East Journal
of Scientific research, vol. 24, no. 12, pp. 3812-3819.