Hierarchical Routing Protocols
With this type of protocols the choice of proactive and of reactive routing depends on the hierarchic level where a node resides. The routing is initially established with some proactively prospected routes and then serves the demand from additionally activated nodes through reactive flooding on the lower levels. The choice for one or the other method requires proper attributation for respective levels. The main disadvantages of such algorithms are:
- Advantage depends on depth of nesting and addressing scheme.
- Reaction to traffic demand depends on meshing parameters.
Examples of hierarchical routing algorithms are:
- CBRP (Cluster Based Routing Protocol) – M. JIANG, J. LI, Y. C. TAY Cluster Based Routing Protocol (CBRP) Functional Specification Internet Draft, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-cbrp-spec, work in progress, June 1999.
- CEDAR (Core Extraction Distributed Ad hoc Routing) – RAGHUPATHY SIVAKUMAR, PRASUN SINHA, VADUVUR BHARGHAVAN Core Extraction Distributed Ad hoc Routing (CEDAR) Specification, Internet Draft, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-cedar-spec; PRASUN SINHA, RAGHUPATHY SIVAKUMAR, VADUVUR BHARGHAVAN CEDAR: A Core-Extraction Distributed Ad Hoc Routing Algorithm, The 18th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, INFOCOM '99 New York, NY, USA, pp. 202–209 IEEE, March 1999
- FSR (Fisheye State Routing protocol) – MARIO GERLA, GUANGYU PEI, XIAOYAN HONG, TSU-WEI CHEN Fisheye State Routing Protocol (FSR) for Ad Hoc Networks Internet Draft, http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-manet-fsr, work in progress, June 2001.
Read more about this topic: List Of Ad Hoc Routing Protocols
Famous quotes containing the word hierarchical:
“Authority is the spiritual dimension of power because it depends upon faith in a system of meaning that decrees the necessity of the hierarchical order and so provides for the unity of imperative control.”
—Shoshana Zuboff (b. 1951)