A Comparative Study of Routing Strategies for Wireless Sensor Networks: Are MANET Protocols Good Fit?

  • Yasser Gadallah
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4104)


The operation of sensor networks places special requirements on routing algorithms. These requirements stem from the unique nature of these networks. For example, the algorithm needs to be data-oriented and it should impose the smallest possible overhead on the resource-constrained nodes of the network. It has been long claimed that algorithms designed for mobile ad hoc networks (MANET) should not be considered for sensor networks for several reasons. Most important of these reasons is their heavy operation overhead. In this study, we examine this claim by comparing two of the sensor network specific algorithms, directed diffusion and TTDD, with two MANET algorithms, AODV and OLSR which belong to the reactive and proactive routing categories, respectively. We run experiments with realistic sensor network scenarios. We show that MANET protocols perform significantly better than their sensor-specific counterparts. Finally, we offer suggestions for future research based on the results of our study.


Sensor Networks Routing MANET Performance Comparison 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Akkaya, K., Younis, M.: A survey on routing protocols for wireless sensor networks. Elsevier Journal of Ad Hoc Networks 3(3), 325–349 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dunkles, A., Alonso, J., Voigt, T.: Making TCP/IP viable for wireless sensor networks. In: Karl, H., Wolisz, A., Willig, A. (eds.) EWSN 2004. LNCS, vol. 2920. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Estrin, D., Govindan, R., Heidemann, J., Kumar, S.: Next Century Challenges: Scalable Coordination in Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of the 5th annual ACM/IEEE international conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom 1999), Seattle, WA, USA, pp. 263–269 (August 1999)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gadallah, Y., Kunz, T.: A protocol independent energy saving technique for mobile ad hoc networks. Accepted for the special issue on Mobile and Wireless Networking, International Journal of High Performance Computing and Networking (IJHPCN) 4(1) (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Intanagonwiwat, C., Govindan, R., Estrin, D., Heidemann, J., Silva, F.: Directed diffusion for wireless sensor networks. ACM/IEEE Transactions on Networking 11(1), 2–16 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    INRIA – Project HIPERCOM,
  7. 7.
    Jacquet, P., Muhlethaler, P., Clausen, T., Laouiti, A., Qayyum, A., Viennot, L.: Optimized Link State Routing protocol for Ad Hoc Networks. IEEE INMIC, Pakistan (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Perkins, C.E., Royer, E.M.: Ad-hoc On-Demand Distance Vector Routing. In: Proceedings of 2nd IEEE workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, February 1999, pp. 90–100 (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    UCLA Internet Lab – GRAB Project,
  10. 10.
    Ye, F., Luo, H., Cheng, J., Lu, S., Zhang, L.: A Two-Tier Data Dissemination Model for Large-scale Wireless Sensor Networks. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (ACM MobiCom), Atlanta, Georgia, USA, September 2002, pp. 148–159 (2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    The Network Simulator – ns-2,

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yasser Gadallah
    • 1
  1. 1.Communications Research Centre (CRC) CanadaOttawaCanada

Personalised recommendations