SPIN : SENSOR PROTOCOL FOR INFORMATION VIA NEGOTIATION

SUBMITTED BY :

SANCHAITA CHATTERJEE

ROLL : 13000110041

CSE -4TH YEAR

CONTENT Data Centric Protocol SPIN

Introduction Features Working Goal Two Basic Ideas Protocols

SPIN-PP, SPIN-EC, SPIN-BC, SPIN-RL SPIN 1 and SPIN 2 Advantages Disadvantages Future Work Limitations Conclusion

DATA CENTRIC PROTOCOL

Data centric protocols are query based and they depend on the naming of the desired data, thus it eliminates much redundant transmissions.

The BS sends queries to a certain area for information and waits for reply from the nodes of that particular region.

Depending on the query, sensors collect a particular data from the area of interest.

This particular information is only required to transmit to the BS and thus reducing the number of transmissions SPIN was the first data centric protocol

SPIN - INTRODUCTION

SPIN stands for Sensor Protocol for Information via Negotiation.

SPIN uses negotiation and resources adaption to address the deficiencies of flooding.

Negotiation reduces overlap and implosion.

assign a high-level name to completely describe their collected data (called meta-data)

Use three types of messages ADV (advertisement), REQ (request) and DATA.

INTRODUCTION CONTD…

Designed to classify the deficiencies of classic flooding by negotiation and resource adaptation.

Sending data that describe the sensor data instead of sending the whole data

The sensor nodes that are interested in the data will get a copy.

SPIN is based on data-centric routing – broadcast an advertisement of the available data and wait for a request from interested sinks.

SPIN- FEATURES

Application-level Control

Meta-data

SPIN Message

Resource Management

Negotiation : to operate efficiently and to conserve energy using a meta-data.

Resource adaptation : to extend the operating lifetime of the system monitoring their own energy resources.

APPLICATION LEVEL CONTROL

Design motivated by Application Level Framing (ALF) network protocols must choose transmission units that

are meaningful to application. packetization is best done in terms of application data

units. Next step: routing decisions are also best made in

application-controlled and application-specific ways using knowledge of not just network topology but also

application data layout and the state of resources at each node.

FEATURES – contd…

META-DATA

Sensors use meta-data to describe the sensor data briefly Consider data X and data Y

If x is the meta-data descriptor for data X sizeOf (x) < sizeOf (X)

If x<>y sensor-data-of (x) <> sensor-data-of (y), i.e X<>Y

If X<>Y meta-data-of (X) <> meta-data-of (Y)

Meta-data format is application specific

Data about dataExample : Geographically disjoint sensors, may use their unique ID, say all data by sensor x Target tracking – signal energy + geographical location

FEATURES – contd…

SPIN MESSAGES

ADV – advertise data REQ – request specific data DATA – requested data

A B

A B

A B

ADV

REQ

DATA

FEATURES – contd…

Resource Management

Sensors poll their system resources to find available energy.

They can also calculate cost of performing computations.

FEATURES – contd…

WORKING OF SPIN

Resource adaptive algorithm

When energy is plentiful Communicate using the 3-stage handshake

protocol.

When energy is approaching a low-energy threshold If a node receives ADV, it does not send out REQ Energy is reserved to sensing the event

WORKING OF SPIN CONTD…

SPIN :THE GOAL

Broadcast with minimum energy

CONVENTIONAL APPROACH

B

D E

FG

C

A

Send to all neighbors E.g. routing table updates

Flooding

RESOURCE INEFFICIENCIES

3. Resource Blindness

2. Overlap problem1. Implosion Problem

Gossiping

A

C

BD

Forward data to a random neighbor Avoids implosion Disseminates information at a slower rate Fastest rate = 1 node/round

WHAT IS THE OPTIMUM PROTOCOL?

B

D E

FG

C

A

“Ideal” Shortest-path routes Avoids overlap Minimum energy Need global topology information

TWO BASIC IDEAS

The SPIN family of protocols rests upon two basic ideas:

To operate efficiently and to conserve energy

Nodes in a network must monitor and adapt to changes in their own energy resources to extend the operating lifetime of the system.

SPIN ON POINT-TO-POINT NETWORKS

SPIN-PP 3-stage handshake protocol Advantages

Simple Minimal start-up cost

SPIN-EC SPIN-PP + low-energy threshold Modifies behavior based on current energy resources

SPIN on Broadcast Networks One transmission reaches all neighbors SPIN-BC

Same 3-stage handshake protocol as SPIN-BC Uses only broadcast communication

Same transmission cost as unicast Coordination among nodes Broadcast message suppressionsensor-data-of (x) = sensor-data-of (y)

SPIN-RL SPIN-BC + Reliability Periodically re-broadcast ADVs and REQs

SPIN 1 AND SPIN 2 SPIN Resource Management

Can make informed decisions about using their resources effectively Specifies an interface that applications can use to probe their available

resources

SPIN Implementation Implement the basis SPIN message types, message handling routines

and, resource management functions Sensor applications can then use these libraries to construct their own

SPIN protocols

SPIN-1 : 3-Stage Handshake Protocol Simple handshake protocol for disseminating data through a lossless

network Work in three stages (ADV-REQ-DATA)

Computer Network21

SPIN 1 AND SPIN 2 SPIN-1 : 3-Stage Handshake Protocol

Node A starts by advertising its data to node B (a).

Node B responds by sending a request to node A (b).

After receiving the requested data (c), node B then sends out advertisement to its neighbors (d), who in turn send requests back to B (e, f).

SPIN 1 AND SPIN 2

SPIN-2 : SPIN-1 with a Low-Energy Threshold Adds a simple energy-conservation heuristic to the SPIN-1 protocol When energy is plentiful, SPIN-2 nodes communicate using the same 3-stage protocol as SPIN-1 node When its energy is approaching a low-energy threshold, it adapts by

reducing its participation in the protocol

SPIN-1 : 3-Stage Handshake Protocol SPIN-1 can be run in a completely un-configured network with a

small, startup cost to determine nearest neighbors. If the topology of the network changes frequently, these change only

have to travel one hop before the nodes can continue running the algorithm.

ADVANTAGES

Topological changes are localized - Each node needs to know only its neighbors

provides more energy savings than flooding, and metadata negotiation almost halves the redundant data.

Resource-adaptive enhancements.

Outperforms gossiping.

Seems better than flooding (solves data implosion and overlap).

Simplicity Each node performs little decision making when it receives

new data Need not forwarding table

DISADVANTAGES

SPIN’s data advertisement mechanism cannot guarantee delivery of data. Large overhead

Data broadcasting

The paper does not consider collisions in the REQ stage

Implosion problem still exists in REQ stage

SPIN not good for applications that need reliable data delivery.

FUTURE WORK

Consider the cost of not only communicating data, but also synthesizing data, make it more realistic resource-adaptation protocols.

Queuing delay, loss-prone nature of wireless channels can be incorporated and experimented.

LIMITATIONS The SPIN EC(Energy Constrained) version’s strategy may

be too simple. There should be a topology dependent strategy,

e.g. a narrow bridge connecting two connected component should be more energy conservative.

The ideal criteria used to compare with SPIN is ideal in terms of data dissemination rate, so really not ‘ideal’ anymore when energy or other resources are limited, need a new goal function.

CONCLUSIONS

Successfully use meta-data negotiation to solve the implosion, overlap problem of simple flooding and gossiping.

Resource-adaptive enhancements

Simple scheme, small communication overhead, but a performance close to the ideal situation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Negotiation based protocols for Disseminating Information in Wireless Sensor Networks by Joanna Kulik, Wendi Heinzelman, and Hari Balakrishnan

www.google.com

THANK YOU !!