UNIT II

MAC AND ROUTING PROTOCOLS

MAC protocols – fundamentals, low duty cycle protocols and wakeup
concepts, contention and Schedule-based protocols - SMAC,
BMAC,TRAMA, Routing protocols – Requirements, Classification
-SPIN, Directed Diffusion, COUGAR, ACQUIRE, LEACH, PEGASIS.

Contention Based Protocols

In contention-based protocols, a given transmit opportunity toward a receiver node can in
principle be taken by any of its neighbors. If only one neighbor tries its luck, the packet goes
through the channel. If two or more neighbors try their luck, these have to compete with each
other and in unlucky cases, for example, due to hidden-terminal situations, a collision might
occur, wasting energy for both transmitter and receiver. Section 5.1.2 briefly presented two
important contentionbased protocols: (slotted) ALOHA and CSMA, along with mechanisms to
solve the hidden-terminal problem. In the following sections, we discuss variations of these
protocols with the goal to conserve energy.
As opposed to some of the contention-based protocols having a periodic wakeup scheme,
the protocols described in this section have no idle listening avoidance and make no
restrictions as to when a node can receive a packet.
CSMA protocols
Woo and Culler [888] investigate several CSMA variants for their inherent energy costs and
their fairness, without specifying any measures for idle listening avoidance or overhearing
avoidance. “Inherent cost” subsumes mainly the energy spent on transmitting and receiving.
The authors consider a multihop network with a single or only a few sinks and the same
traffic pattern as already envisioned for STEM: A network that is idle for long times and starts
to become active when triggered by an important external event. Upon the triggering event,
all nodes wish to transmit simultaneously, potentially creating lots of collisions. In the case
that the nodes want to send their packets periodically, the danger of collisions is repeated if
no special measures are taken. The nodes are assumed to know an upstream neighbor to
which they have to forward packets destined for the sink. This upstream neighbor is also
called the parent node. Each node generates local sensor traffic and additionally works as a
forwarder for downstream nodes. Only a single channel is required.
We briefly discuss the skeleton of the different CSMA protocols. Figure 5.9 shows the
several steps a node passes through in case of a transmission as a finite state automaton.
After a node gets a new packet for transmission from its upper layers, it starts with a random
delay and initializes its trial counter num retries with zero. The purpose of the random delay
is to desynchronize nodes that are initially synchronized by the external event. During this
random delay, the node’s transceiver can be put into sleep mode. During the following listen
period, the node performs carrier sensing. If the medium is found to be busy and the number
of trials so far is smaller than the maximum number, the node goes into the backoff mode. In
the backoff mode, the node waits a random amount of time, which can depend on the
number of trials and during which the node can sleep (the protocol is thus a nonpersistent
CSMA variant). The backoff mode can also be used by the application layer to initiate a
“phase change” for its locally generated periodic traffic. This phase change aims to
desynchronize correlated or periodic traffic of different nodes. After the backoff mode
finishes, the node listens again. If the medium is busy and the node has exhausted its
maximum number of trials, the packet is dropped. If the medium is idle, the node transmits
an RTS packet and enters the “Await CTS” state, where it waits for the corresponding CTS
packet (this step can be skipped if the node knows that there is currently a low load
situation). In case no CTS packet arrives or a CTS packet for another transaction is
received, the node either enters the backoff mode or drops the packet, depending on the
value of num retries. If the CTS packet arrives, the node sends its data packet and waits for
an acknowledgment. This acknowledgment can be either an explicit acknowledgment
packet, or the parent node piggybacks the acknowledgment on a packet that it forwards to
the node’s grandparent. However, for such a piggybacked acknowledgment, it is not an easy
task to determine an appropriate waiting time until the acknowledgment must arrive at the
child. Several variants of this skeleton (no random delay vs. random delay, random listening
time vs. constant listening time, fixed window backoff vs. exponentially increasing backoff vs.
exponentially decreasing backoff vs. no backoff) have been investigated in a single-hop
scenario with a triggering event and it turns out that protocols with random delay, fixed
listening time, and a backoff algorithm with sleeping radio transceiver give the best
throughput as well as lowest aggregate energy consumption, when compared with other
CSMA variants, including IEEE 802.11.
PAMAS
The PAMAS protocol (Power Aware Multiaccess with Signaling) presented by Raghavendra
and Singh [668] is originally designed for ad hoc networks. It provides a detailed overhearing
avoidance mechanism while it does not consider the idle listening problem. The protocol
combines the busy-tone solution and RTS/CTS handshake similar to the MACA protocol
(MACA uses no final acknowledgment packet). A distinctive feature of PAMAS is that it uses
two channels: a data channel and a control channel. All the signaling packets (RTS, CTS,
busy tones) are transmitted on the control channel, while the data channel is reserved for
data packets. We follow Raghavendra and Singh [668] in first describing the main protocol
operation and then discussing the power-conservation enhancements.
Let us consider an idle node x to which a new packet destined to a neighboring node y
arrives. First, x sends an RTS packet on the control channel without doing any carrier
sensing. This packet carries both x’s and y’s MAC addresses. If y receives this packet, it
answers with a CTS packet if y does not know of any ongoing transmission in its vicinity.
Upon receiving the CTS, x starts to transmit the packet to y on the data channel. When y
starts to receive the data, it sends out a busy-tone packet on the control channel. If x fails to
receive a CTS packet within some time window, it enters the backoff mode, where a binary
exponential backoff scheme is used (i.e., the backoff time is uniformly chosen from a time
interval that is doubled after each failure to receive a CTS).
Now, let us look at the nodes receiving x’s RTS packet on the control channel. There is the
intended receiver y and there are other nodes; let z be one of them. If z is currently receiving
a packet, it reacts by sending a busy-tone packet, which overlaps with y’s CTS at node x and
effectively destroys the CTS. Therefore, x cannot start transmission and z’s packet reception
is not disturbed. Since the busy-tone packet is longer than the CTS, we can be sure that the
CTS is really destroyed. Next, we consider the intended receiver y. If y knows about an
ongoing transmission in its vicinity, it suppresses its CTS, causing x to back off. Node y can
obtain this knowledge by either sensing the data channel or by checking whether there was
some noise on the control channel immediately after receiving the RTS. This noise can be
an RTS or CTS of another node colliding at y. In the other case, y answers with a CTS
packet and starts to send out a busy-tone packet as soon as x’s transmission has started.
Furthermore, y sends out busy-tone packets each time it receives some noise or a valid
packet on the control channel, to prevent its neighborhood from any activities.
A node that receives an RTS packet while being in the backoff state starts its packet
reception procedure, that is, it checks the conditions for sending a CTS. When can a node
put its transceivers (control and data) into sleep mode? Roughly speaking, any time a node
knows that it cannot transmit or receive packets because some other node in its vicinity is
already doing so. However, the decision to go into sleep mode raises an important question:
when to wake up again? This decision is easy if a node x knows about the length of an
ongoing transmission, for example from overhearing the RTS or CTS packets or the header
of the data packets on the data channel. However, often this length is unknown to x, for
example, because these packets are corrupted or a foreign data transmission cycle starts
when x is just sleeping.
Additional procedures are needed to resolve this. Suppose that x wakes up and finds the
data channel busy. There are two cases to distinguish: either x has no own packet to send or
x wants to transmit. In the first case, x desires to go back into sleep mode and to wake up
exactly when the ongoing transmission ends to be able to receive an immediately following
packet. Waking up at the earliest possible time has the advantage of avoiding unwanted
delays. However, since x may not have overheard the RTS, CTS, or data packet header
belonging to the ongoing transmission, it runs a probing protocol on the control channel to
inquire the length of the ongoing packet. This probing protocol works similar to a binary
search algorithm. Let l be the maximal packet length in seconds. First, x sends a t probe(l/2,
l) packet, and any transmitter node who finishes in the time interval [l/2, l] answers with a t
probe response(t) packet, indicating the time t where its transmission ends. If x manages to
receive t probe response(t) packet, it knows exactly when this single ongoing transmission
ends and when to wake up the next time. If x receives only noise in response, several t
probe response(t) may have collided at x and x starts to search in the subinterval [3l/4, l],
again hoping for a single answer only. If no answer arrives at all upon t probe(3l/4, l), x next
checks the interval [l/2, 3l/4], and so on. In the other case, x wakes up during an ongoing
transmission and wants to transmit a packet. Therefore, x has not only to take care of
ongoing transmissions but also of ongoing receptions in its vicinity. To find the time for the
next wakeup, x runs the described probing protocol for the set of transmitters, giving a time t
when the longest ongoing transmission ends. In addition, x runs a similar probing protocol
for the set of receivers in its neighborhood, indicating the time r when the longest ongoing
reception ends. Finally, x schedules its wakeup for time min{r, t }. The rationale for this
choice is: If t < r, waking up at t might give another node y a chance to transmit a packet to x
without any additional delay. On the other hand, if r < t, there is some chance that x can start
its own transmission. Raghavendra and Singh [668] compare the power-saving performance
of PAMAS with overhearing avoidance against PAMAS without this feature. Analytical and
simulation results are presented for several network topologies, node densities, and load
scenarios. For the case of random networks, the power savings for low load situations
depend on the average node degree, that is, the average number of neighbors that a node
has. Clearly, the more neighbors a node x has, the more can switch their transceivers off
when x actually transmits. For low loads also, the number of control packets is smaller than
for high loads. This is particularly true for the busy-tone packets. PAMAS saves up to 60% of
energy for low loads and a high node degree, and still between 20 and 30% are reached for
low node degrees under a low load. In high load situations, between ≈10 and ≈40% of
energy savings can be achieved, with higher savings for higher node degrees.
Schedule Based Protocols
We discuss some schedule-based protocols that do not explicitly address idle listening
avoidance but do so implicitly, for example, by employing TDMA schemes, which explicitly
assign transmission and reception opportunities to nodes and let them sleep at all other
times. A second fundamental advantage of schedule-based protocols is that transmission
schedules can be computed such that no collisions occur at receivers and hence no special
mechanisms are needed to avoid hidden-terminal situations.
However, these schemes also have downsides. First, the setup and maintenance of
schedules involves signaling traffic, especially when faced to variable topologies. Second, if
a TDMA variant is employed, time is divided into comparably small slots, and both
transmitter and receiver have to agree to slot boundaries to actually meet each other and to
avoid overlaps with other slots, which would lead to collisions. However, maintaining time
synchronization involves some extra signaling traffic. For cheap sensor nodes with cheap
oscillators, one can expect the clocks of different nodes to drift comparably quickly and
resynchronization is required frequently. A third drawback is that such schedules are not
easily adapted to different load situations on small timescales. Specifically, in TDMA, it is
difficult for a node to give up unused time slots to its neighbors. A further disadvantage is
that the schedule of a node (and possibly those of its neighbors) may require a significant
amount of memory, which is a scarce resource in several sensor node designs. Finally,
distributed assignment of conflict-free TDMA schedules is a difficult problem in itself.

Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)

Question 1: What is the primary challenge associated with contention-based MAC protocols
in Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs)?
A) High data transmission rates
B) Time synchronization requirements
C) Potential for collisions due to hidden-terminal situations
D) Complex routing algorithms
Answer:
C) Potential for collisions due to hidden-terminal situations

Question 2: Which of the following is a key advantage of schedule-based MAC protocols

over contention-based protocols?
A) Reduced power consumption due to continuous listening
B) Simpler implementation
C) Collision-free communication due to predefined transmission schedules
D) Higher data rates
Answer:
C) Collision-free communication due to predefined transmission schedules

Question 3: In contention-based protocols, what is the purpose of the random backoff

mechanism?
A) To increase the chance of packet collisions
B) To ensure simultaneous transmissions
C) To desynchronize nodes that are initially synchronized
D) To maximize bandwidth usage
Answer:
C) To desynchronize nodes that are initially synchronized

Question 4: What is a significant disadvantage of schedule-based MAC protocols in WSNs?

A) Increased risk of packet collisions
B) Need for frequent time synchronization due to clock drift
C) Inefficiency in low traffic conditions
D) High power consumption due to continuous transmission
Answer:
B) Need for frequent time synchronization due to clock drift

Question 5: Which protocol is known for its power-saving feature by using a busy-tone
channel to avoid overhearing?
A) CSMA
B) S-MAC
C) PAMAS
D) TDMA
Answer:
C) PAMAS (Power Aware Multiaccess with Signaling)