Instrumental Supporting System for Developing and Analysis of Software-Defined Networks of Mobile Objects

This article describes the organization principles for wireless mesh-networks (software-defined net-works of mobile objects). The emphasis is on the questions of getting effective routing algorithms for such networks. The mathematical model of the system is the standard transportation network. The key parameter of the routing system is the node reachability coefficient — the function depending on several basic and additional parameters (“mesh-factors”), which characterize the route between two network nodes. Each pair (arc, node) is juxtaposed to a composite parameter which characterizes the “reacha-bility” of the node by the route which begins with this arc. The best (“shortest”) route between two nodes is the route with the maximum reachability coefficient. The rules of building and refreshing the routing tables by the network nodes are described. With the announcement from the neighbor the node gets the information about the connection energy and reliability, the announcement time of receipt, the absence of transitional nodes and also about the connection capability. On the basis of this information
the node applies the penalization (decreasing the reachability coefficient) or the reward (increasing the reachability coefficient) to all routes through this neighbor node. The penalization / reward scheme has some separate aspects: 1. Penalization for the actuality of information. 2. Penalization / reward for the reliability of a node. 3. Penalization for the connection energy. 4. Penalization for the present connection capability. The simulator of the wireless mesh-network of mobile objects is written. It is based on the suggested heuristic algorithms. The description and characteristics of the simulator are stated in the article. The peculiarities of its program realization are also examined.

1. “B.A.T.M.A.N. Advanced Documentation Overview”, 2014, http://www.open-mesh.org/projects/batman-adv/wiki.

2. Conner W. S. et al., “IEEE 802.11s Tutorial”, 2006, http://www.ieee802.org/802 tutorials/06-November/802.11s Tutorial r5.pdf.

3. “Mobile Mesh Networks for Military, Defense and Public Safety”, 2015, http://meshdynamics.com/military-mesh-networks.html.

4. Shen W. L. et al., “Autonomous Mobile Mesh Networks”, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 13:2 (2014), 364–376.

5. Boukerche A. et al., “Routing protocols in ad hoc networks: A survey”, Computer Networks, 55:13 (2011), 3032–3080.

6. Broch J. et al., “A Performance Comparison of Multi-Hop Wireless Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols”, Proc. of ACM/IEEE International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, 1998, 85–97.

7. Servetto S.D., Barrenechea G., “Constrained Random Walks on Random Graphs: Routing Algorithms for Large Scale Wireless Sensor Networks”, Proc. of 1st ACM International Workshop on Wireless Sensor Networks and Applications, 2002, 12–21.

8. Nelakuditi S. et al., “Adaptive Proportional Routing: A Localized QoS Routing Approach”, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 10:6 (2002), 790–804.

9. Baumann R. et al., “Routing in Large-Scale Wireless Mesh Networks Using Temperature Fields”, IEEE Network, 2008, 25–31.

10. Cormen T. H. et al., Introduction to Algorithms, MIT Press, 2009.

11. Perkins Ch. E. et al., “Performance Comparison of Two On-demand Routing protocols for Ad Hoc Networks”, IEEE Personal Communications, 2001, 16–28.

12. Awerbuch B. et al., “On the Survivability of Routing Protocols in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks”, CERIAS Tech Report 2005–121, 2005.

13. Nelakuditi S., Zhang Zh.-L., “On Selection of Paths for Multipath Routing”, Proc. of IWQoS, 2001, 170–186.

14. Nguyen Ph. H. et al., “Distributed routing algorithms to manage power flow in agent-based active distribution network”, Innovative Smart Grid Technologies Conference Europe (ISGT Europe), IEEE PES, 2010, 1–7.

15. Brunsch T. et al., “Smoothed Analysis of the Successive Shortest Path Algorithm”, 2015, arXiv: 1501.05493v1.

16. Spielman D. A., Teng Sh.-H., “Smoothed analysis of algorithms: Why the simplex algorithm usually takes polynomial time”, Journal of the ACM, 51:3 (2004), 385–463.