Francisco, I share with you some considerations and a little of references
that I'm writing for the next paper in witch I've obtain a distribuite
protocol that works not so bad!
If you are interested or want more infos and simulated evidences, you can
write to me.
Plainly I would like to work with everyone interested in this research
topic.

P.S. Sorry for the English, this is an alpha version :-)

<<
The address allocation process (also know as autoconfiguration process) is
required to enable dynamic assignment of network addresses to nodes. This
functionality is necessary apart from the choice to make or not use of the
node identifier as routing address, cause the well know features of the ad
hoc paradigm (mobility, absence of infrastructure, ecc.). Also a static
network, as a wireless sensor one, needs for this process to make use of
unicast communications [1, 1A].
The allocation technique here presented uses a stateful approach based on
multiple disjoint allocation tables and is inspired by Buddy protocol [2].
The stateful approach [3, 4] stores somewhere informations about the
addresses in use, in order to avoid to flood the network for Duplicate
Address Detection (DAD) as in stateless one [5, 6, 7]. Likewise Buddy
system, in our protocol, when a node joins a network and claims for an
address, the node assigning a valid address transfers delegates also control
over half of his address space to the requester.
Networks merge and partition yield to duplication addresses, independently
from the approach. In this work we use a Network IDentifier (NID) to handle
with events as in [7B, 8, 9]. If a node receives a packet with a NID
different from his own, a network merge is happens and the nodes with the
lower NID will change their address.
We want to point out that, differently from the works cited before, our
proposal, inspired by DART protocol [10], doesn’t flood the network. The
address allocation overhead is cut down to a periodical locally broadcasted
and size-limited hello” packet, without need of response packet; moreover,
the same packet is used for the neighbour discovery process to hold the
global overhead.
However neither DART [10] nor a variable-length version based on [11] design
an effective procedure to manage networks partition. The address allocation
schema illustrated in [12] and inspired by the ZigBee one [13] can be
considered as an extension to multi-dimensional Cartesian space of the
DART’s tree-based addressing schema; still its allocation process relies on
flooding and so it doesn’t scale well with the numbers of nodes in the
network.

[1]             Motegi, S., Yoshihara, K,. and Horiuchi, H. Implementation
and Evaluation of On-demand Address Allocation for Event-Driven Sensor
Network. 2005 Symposium on Applications and the Internet (SAINT'05).
[1A]    PalChaudhuri, S., Du, S., Saha, A., Johnson, B. TreeCast: A
Stateless Addressing and Routing Architecture for Sensor Networks. 18th
International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS '04)
[3]     S. Nesargi and R. Prakash, “MANETconf: Configuration of hosts in a
mobile ad hoc network,” Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, New York, NY, June 2002.
[4]     H. Zhou, L.M. Ni, and M.W. Mutka, “Prophet address allocation for
large scale MANETs,” Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, San Francisco, CA, Mar.2003.
[5]     C. Perkins, J. T. Malinen, R. Wakikawa, E. M. Belding-Royer, and Y.
Sun, “IP address autoconfiguration for ad hoc networks,” IETF Draft, 2001.
[6]     N. H. Vaidya, “Weak duplicate address detection in mobile ad hoc
networks,” Proc. ACM MobiHoc, Lausanne, Switzerland, pp.206–216, June 2002.
[7]     K. Weniger, “Passive duplicate address detection in mobile ad hoc
networks,” Proc. IEEE WCNC, New Orleans, LA, Mar. 2003.
[7B]    D. O Mahony, S. Toner. “Self organising node address management
protocol for ad hoc networks,” In Springer Verlag Lecture notes in Computer
Science 2775, Springer Verlag, Berlin, 2003.
 [8]    Y.Sun and E.M. Belding Royer, “Dynamic address configuration in
mobile ad hoc  networks,” UCSB tech. rep., Santa Barbara, CA, June 2003.
[9]     M.R.Thoppian and R. Prakash, “A distributed protocol for dynamic
address assignment in mobile ad hoc networks,” IEEE Transactions on Mobile
Computing, vol.5, no.1, pp.4 – 19, Jan. 2006.
[10]    J. Eriksson, M. Faloutsos, and S. Krishnamurthy, “Scalable ad hoc
routing: The case for dynamic addressing,” INFOCOM, 2004.
[11]    U. Amaya, S. Dhirakaosal and W. Jawor, “Variable-length Address
Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks,”.
[12]    G. Bhatti and G. Yue, “A Structured Addressing Scheme for Wireless
Multi-Hop Networks,” Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories technical
report, 2006.
[13]    N. Liang, P. Chen, T- Sun, G. Yang, L. Chen and Mario Gerla, “Impact
of Node Heterogeneity in ZigBee Mesh  Network Routing,” 2006 IEEE
International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC '06).
>>

-------------------------------

Marcello Caleffi, Ph.D. student
Department of Electronics and Telecommunications Engineering
University of Naples "Federico II"
Via Claudio 21
80125 Naples ITALY
http://wpage.unina.it/marcello.caleffi/





-----Messaggio originale-----
Da: Francisco José Hernández Medialdea [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Inviato: lunedì 22 gennaio 2007 11.25
A: [email protected]
Oggetto: [ns] address duplication

     Hi to all:


 I'm studying the MANET behavior and am interested in seing how they respond
to the presence of address duplications. The problem is that, as I have
observed, it is not allowed to have different nodes with the same addresses,
so, if you know what I could do in order to get it, please, help me, I'm
really interested in getting that. I have heard there are people who made
succesfull experiments in order to cope with this conflict. If you have any
idea... Thank you very much in advance!!

Bye!!



-- 
Il messaggio e' stato analizzato alla ricerca di virus o
contenuti pericolosi da MailScanner, ed e'
risultato non infetto.


Reply via email to