Advertisement

Implementation of Connected Dominating Set in Fog Computing Using Knowledge-Upgraded IoT Devices

Chapter

Abstract

Wireless sensor networks (WSNs) have a worldwide attraction because of its increasing popularity. The key enablers for the Internet of Things (IoT) are WSN, which plays an important role in future by collecting information through the cloud. Fog Computing, the latest innovations, connects sensor-based IoT devices to the cloud. Fog Computing is a decentralized computing infrastructure in which the data, compute, storage, and applications are distributed efficiently between the data source and the cloud. The main aim of Fog Computing is to reduce the amount of data transported to the cloud and hence increase the efficiency. The knowledge-upgraded IoT devices will be embedded with a piece of software into it, which can able to understand the Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS). Such attacks are not forwarded to the cloud and thus the cloud server down problem is avoided. The IoT devices enabled with such knowledge is connected together to form a Connected Dominating Set (CDS). The data routed through only such IoT devices will be directly connected to the cloud. The CDS-based approach reduces the search for a minimum group of IoT devices called nodes, thus forming the backbone network. Various CDS algorithms have been developed for constructing CDSs with minimum number of nodes. However, most of the research work does not focus on developing a CDS based on application and requirement. In this chapter, a Gateway-based Strategic CDS (GWS-CDS) is constructed based on strategy and communication range. Here, any node in the network assigned a critical communication range, which is in a strong neighbourhood and which is within the communication range of more than one network, will be selected as the starting node, instead of the node with maximum connectivity. If a node is not within a critical communication range, then the following factors will be increased: the number of nodes that locally compete over a shared channel, access delay, network throughput and network partitioning. The other nodes for CDS construction are selected based on density and velocity. The focus of this research work was to construct a CDS in heterogeneous networks. The algorithm was tested with respect to three metrics—average CDS node size, average CDS Edge Size and average hop count per path. Simulation results showed that the proposed algorithm was better when compared to the existing algorithms.

Keywords

Wireless sensor networks IoT Fog Computing Communication range CDS Strategy Density Velocity and gateway nodes 

Notes

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the use of services and facilities of the Centre for Networking and Cyber Defense (CNCD) at  Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science, Chennai, India.

References

  1. 1.
    Baccarelli, Enzo, et al. (2017). Fog of everything: Energy-efficient networked computing architectures, research challenges and a case study. IEEE Access, 5, 9882–9910.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Marín-Tordera, E., et al. (2017). Do we all really know what a fog node is? Current trends towards an open definition. Computer Communications, 109, 117–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Verba, N., et al. (2016). Platform as a service gateway for the fog of things. Advanced Engineering Informatics, Article in press.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arkian, H. R., Diyanat, A., & Pourkhalili, A. (2017). MIST: Fog-based data analytics scheme with cost-efficient resource provisioning for iot crowdsensing applications. Journal of Network and Computer Applications, 82, 152–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wu, J., Lou, W., & Dai, F. (2006). Extended multipoint relays to determine connected dominating sets in manets. IEEE Transactions on Computers, 55(3), 334–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sanchez, M., Manzoni, P., & Haas, Z. J. (1999). Determination of critical transmission range in ad-hoc networks. Multiaccess, Mobility and Teletraffic in Wireless Communications, 4, 293–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Santi, P. (2005). The critical transmitting range for connectivity in mobile ad hoc networks. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 4(3), 310–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Deng, J., et al. (2007). Optimal transmission range for wireless ad hoc networks based on energy efficiency. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 55(9), 1772–1782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sharmila, C., & George, A. (2014). Construction of strategic connected dominating set for mobile ad hoc networks. Journal of Computer Science, 10(2), 285–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Akbari Torkestani, J., & Meybodi, M. R. (2010). An intelligent backbone formation algorithm for wireless ad hoc networks based on distributed learning automata. Computer Networks, 54(5), 826–843.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hussain, S., Shafique .M. I., & Yang. L. T (2010).Constructing a CDS-based network backbone for energy efficiency in industrial wireless sensor network. In Proceedings of HPCC (pp. 322–328).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Das, B., Sivakumar, R., & Bhargavan, V. (1997). Routing in ad hoc networks using a spine. In International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (pp. 1–20).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Guha, S., & Khuller, S. (1998). Approximation algorithms for connected dominating sets. Algorithmica, 20(4), 374–387.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clark, Brent N., Colbourn, Charles J., & Johnson, David S. (1990). Unit disk graphs. Discrete Mathematics, 86(1-3), 165–177.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Garey, M. R., & Johnson, D. S. (1979). Computers and intractability. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, Print. Print.MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim, D., et al. (2009). Constructing minimum connected dominating sets with bounded diameters in wireless networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 20(2), 147–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Meghanathan, N., & Terrell, M. (2012). An algorithm to determine stable connected dominating sets for mobile ad hoc networks using strong neighborhoods. International Journal of Combinatorial Optimization Problems and Informatics, 3(2), 79–92.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Misra, R., & Mandal, C. (2010). Minimum connected dominating set using a collaborative cover heuristic for ad hoc sensor networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 21(3), 292–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meghanathan, N. (2012). Graph theory algorithm for mobile ad hoc networks. Informatica, 36, 185–200.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bannoura, A., et al. (2016). The wake up dominating set problem. Theoretical Computer Science, 608, 120–134.MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Thai, M. T., et al. (2007). Connected dominating sets in wireless networks with different transmission ranges. IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 6(7), 721–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xiaohong, L. I., et al. (2014). A lifetime-extended size-bounded construction algorithm for connected dominating sets in heterogeneous wireless sensor networks. Journal of Computational Information Systems, 10(16), 6973–6981.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Deng, J., et al. (2007). Optimal transmission range for wireless ad hoc networks based on energy efficiency. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 55(9), 1772–1782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wu J., & Li H. (1999). On calculating connected dominating set for efficient routing in ad hoc wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Workshop on Discrete Algorithms and Methods for Mobile Computing and Communications (pp. 7–14). August 1, 1999 ACM.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Das, B., Sivakumar, E., & Bhargavan, V. (1997) Routing in ad-hoc networks using a virtual backbone. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (IC3N‘97) (pp. 1–20). September 1997.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wu, J., et al. (2002). On calculating power-aware connected dominating sets for efficient routing in ad hoc wireless networks. Journal of Communications and Networks, 4(1), 59–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Yan, X., et al. (2004). A heuristic algorithm for minimum connected dominating set with maximal weight in ad hoc networks. In Grid and Cooperative Computing, Springer Berlin Heidelberg (pp. 719–722).Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gandhi, R., & Parthasarathy, S. (2007). Distributed algorithms for connected domination in wireless networks. Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 67(7), 848–862.CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Fly, P., & Meghanathan, N. (2010). Predicted link expiration time based connected dominating sets for mobile ad hoc networks. International Journal of Computer Science and Engineering, 2(6), 2096–2103.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Information TechnologyHindustan Institute of Technology and ScienceChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsPeriyar Maniammai UniversityThanjavurIndia

Personalised recommendations