skip to main content
10.1145/1868630.1868642acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmswimConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Diff-MAC: a QoS-aware MAC protocol with differentiated services and hybrid prioritization for wireless multimedia sensor networks

Published:20 October 2010Publication History

ABSTRACT

Popularity of Wireless Sensor Networks (WSNs) combined with the multimedia requirements of new applications have enabled Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks (WMSNs) which commonly carry heterogeneous traffic. In order to deliver multiple types of traffic with different requirements in highly resource constrained sensor networks, Quality of Service (QoS) provisioning becomes unavoidable. In this work, we propose Diff-MAC; a QoS-aware and priority-based MAC protocol for WMSNs. Diff-MAC aims to increase the utilization of the channel with effective service differentiation mechanisms while providing fair and fast delivery of the QoS-constrained data. Performance evaluation results of Diff-MAC, obtained through extensive simulations, show significant improvements, in terms of latency, data delivery and energy efficiency, compared to two other existing protocols.

References

  1. I. Akyildiz, T. Melodia, and K. Chowdhury. A survey on wireless multimedia sensor networks. Computer Networks, 51(4):921--960, March 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. M. Caccamo, L. Zhang, L. Sha, and G. Buttazzo. An implicit prioritized access protocol for wireless sensor networks. In Real-Time Systems Symposium, 2002. RTSS 2002. 23rd IEEE, pages 39--48, February 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. D. Chen and P. K. Varshney. Qos support in wireless sensor networks: A survey. In Proc. of the 2004 International Conference on Wireless Networks (ICWN 2004), Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, June 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. A. Demers, S. Keshav, and S. Shenker. Analysis and simulation of a fair queueing algorithm. In SIGCOMM '89: Symposium proceedings on Communications architectures & protocols, pages 1--12, New York, NY, USA, 1989. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. I. Demirkol, F. Alagoz, H. Delic, and C. Ersoy. Wireless sensor networks for intrusion detection: packet traffic modeling. Communications Letters, IEEE, 10(1):22--24, June 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. I. Demirkol and C. Ersoy. Energy and delay optimized contention for wireless sensor networks. Computer Networks, 53(12):2106--2119, August 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. I. Demirkol, C. Ersoy, and F. Alagoz. MAC protocols for wireless sensor networks: A survey. Communications Magazine, IEEE, 44(4):115--121, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. A. Fallahi and E. Hossain. QoS provisioning in wireless video sensor networks: A dynamic power management framework. Wireless Communications, IEEE, 14(6):40--49, december 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. H. B. K. Jamieson and Y. Tay. SIFT: A MAC protocol for event-driven wireless sensor networks. In Third European Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks (EWSN 2006), volume 3868, pages 260--275, Zurich, Switzerland, Feb. 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. B. Karp and H. T. Kung. GPSR: greedy perimeter stateless routing for wireless networks. In MobiCom '00: Proceedings of the 6th annual international conference on Mobile computing and networking, pages 243--254, NY, USA, 2000. ACM. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Y. Liu, I. Elhanany, and H. Qi. An energy-efficient QoS-aware media access control protocol for wireless sensor networks. In Mobile Adhoc and Sensor Systems Conference, 2005. IEEE International Conference on, November 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Z. Liu and I. Elhanany. RL-MAC: A QoS-aware reinforcement learning based MAC protocol for wireless sensor networks. In Networking, Sensing and Control, 2006. ICNSC '06. Proceedings of the 2006 IEEE International Conference on, pages 768--773, August 2006.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. C. Lu, B. Blum, T. Abdelzaher, J. Stankovic, and T. He. RAP: A real-time communication architecture for large-scale wireless sensor networks. In Eighth IEEE Real-Time and Embedded Technology and Applications Symposium, pages 55--66, 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. K. Nguyen, T. Nguyen, C. K. Chaing, and M. Motani. A prioritized MAC protocol for multihop, event-driven wireless sensor networks. In First International Conference on Communications and Electronics, pages 47--52, Oct. 2006.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. K. J. Paek, J. Kim, U. S. Song, and C. S. Hwang. Priority-based medium access control protocol for providing QoS in wireless sensor networks. IEICE Transactions on Information and Systems, E90-D(9):1448--1451, September 2007. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. T. B. Reddy, I. Karthigeyan, B. S. Manoj, and Murthy. Quality of service provisioning in ad hoc wireless networks: A survey of issues and solutions. Ad Hoc Networks, 4(1):83--124, Jan. 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. N. Saxena, A. Roy, and J. Shin. Dynamic duty cycle and adaptive contention window based QoS-MAC protocol for wireless multimedia sensor networks. Computer Networks, 52(13):2532--2542, September 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. J. L. Sobrinho and A. S. Krishnakumar. Quality-of-service in ad hoc carrier sense multiple access wireless networks. Selected Areas in Communications, IEEE Journal on, 17(8):1353--1368, August 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. W. Ye, J. Heidemann, and D. Estrin. Medium access control with coordinated adaptive sleeping for wireless sensor networks. Networking, IEEE/ACM Transactions on, 12(3):493--506, June 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. G. Zhou, J. Lu, C.-Y. Wan, M. Yarvis, and J. Stankovic. BodyQoS: Adaptive and radio-agnostic QoS for body sensor networks. In INFOCOM 2008: The 27th Conference on Computer Communications, pages 565--573, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Diff-MAC: a QoS-aware MAC protocol with differentiated services and hybrid prioritization for wireless multimedia sensor networks
        Index terms have been assigned to the content through auto-classification.

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          Q2SWinet '10: Proceedings of the 6th ACM workshop on QoS and security for wireless and mobile networks
          October 2010
          118 pages
          ISBN:9781450302753
          DOI:10.1145/1868630

          Copyright © 2010 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 20 October 2010

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Q2SWinet '10 Paper Acceptance Rate16of54submissions,30%Overall Acceptance Rate46of131submissions,35%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader