Q-MEHROM: Mobility support and resource reservations for mobile senders and receivers

Peters, Liesbeth; Moerman, Ingrid; Dhoedt, Bart; Demeester, Piet

doi:10.1016/j.comnet.2005.09.008

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Because limited by the volume, sensor nodes are usually battery-powered, this greatly limits the energy of sensor nodes. In addition, as constrainted by the energy and volume, the processing power and storage capacity of the sensor nodes is limited [28][29]. The operating environment of sensor nodes is harsh, as a result, the entire network may collapse due to the breakdown of some nodes, because nodes prone to be lack of processing capacity or the destruction of nature to the nodes.…”

Section: Fig 1 Components Of Wireless Sensor Network Nodementioning

confidence: 99%

Design of Wireless Sensor Networks Considering the Robustness of the Topology

Huang

Cai

Tan

et al. 2012

Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In wireless sensor networks, the sensor nodes are facing the random failure and the selective attacks all the time, which will cause partial or even entire network disintegrating. How to control the failures resulted from random failure or the selective attacks has become a hot topic in recent years. In this paper, we applied three matching models of capacity on three common kinds of wireless sensor network topology, and each model developed a profit function to defense cascading failures. Performances of the proposed matching models of capacity are evaluated using computer simulations. By studying the relationship between network investment and robustness, we find that NM model can defend against cascading failures better and requires a lower investment cost when higher robustness is required .The network performance analysis and the simulation results indicated that it can improve network robustness and invulnerability which are particularly important for the design of networks after applying this algorithm in the wireless sensor network.

show abstract

Section: Fig 1 Components Of Wireless Sensor Network Nodementioning

confidence: 99%

Design of Wireless Sensor Networks Considering the Robustness of the Topology

Huang

Cai

Tan

et al. 2012

Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Unlike HAWAII, MARP supports mesh network topologies without performance complications propagating handover mobility signaling towards the gateway. An alternative per-host local mobility scheme, referred to as Q-MEHROM [11], combines QoSR and mobility in a close-coupled fashion. Q-MEHROM determines paths on demand using the source routing paradigm, and upon a path reservation or release it triggers a link state update.…”

Section: Per-host-based Protocolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such mobile-specifi c routing either replaces or superimposes IP routing inside local domains. Common per-host mobility protocols include Cellular IP and Handoff-Aware Wireless Access Internet Infrastructure (HAWAII) [10], as well as Micro-mobility support with Effi cient Handoff and Route Optimization Mechanisms (MEHROM) [11].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

QoS provision in wireless access networks: a routing perspective considering mobility

Samdanis¹,

Aghvami²

2009

Int J Network Mgmt

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARYFuture wireless communications are expected to provide mobile users access to the desired service with the appropriate quality at any place. The essential elements for assembling such a vision are mobility, quality of service (QoS) provision and scalability, which are expected to be merged into the design process of wireless access networks. Internet mobility support is currently entering a mature phase in which scalable solutions provide low loss or even seamless handovers in cellular and heterogeneous mobile environments. Wireless and mobile QoS architectures extend the equivalent Internet approaches in order to accommodate the requirements associated with the presence of wireless links and mobility. Nevertheless, none of the popular mobility proposals combined with wireless and mobile QoS architectures encounter QoS in the routing function, leaving the QoS provision underutilized. QoS routing (QoSR) complements existing QoS architectures, enhancing application performance especially in the case of congestion, while providing effi cient resource management. However, QoSR was originally designed for fi xed IP networks without taking mobility into account. This paper investigates the interaction of QoSR in wireless access networks, identifying key points for the effi cient cooperation with mobility and existing QoS architectures. Copyright

show abstract

“…In the case where no reservation proxy exists, often it is the CRN that should initiate to release the obsolete reservations [1], [21]: the CRN receiving a new reservation message finds that an existed reservation state has already been created for this flow, but for a different interface, then sends a teardown messages (PathTear or ResvTear) to release the obsolete reservations. This method to release the obsolete reservations is simple and effective if the CRN is near to access routers.…”

Section: Release Of Obsolete Reservationmentioning

confidence: 99%