Load-oriented and interference-aware channel assignment for multicasting in wireless mesh networks
Mobility '08 Proceedings of the International Conference on Mobile Technology, Applications, and Systems
Information Sciences: an International Journal
An interference-free multicast for mesh networks with directional antennas
ICUFN'09 Proceedings of the first international conference on Ubiquitous and future networks
Maximizing multicast call acceptance rate in multi-channel multi-interface wireless mesh networks
IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications
Distributed dynamic mobile multicast
Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing
Journal of Network and Computer Applications
Multicast in multi-channel wireless mesh networks
NETWORKING'10 Proceedings of the 9th IFIP TC 6 international conference on Networking
Dynamic region-based mobile multicast
Wireless Communications & Mobile Computing
Wireless Personal Communications: An International Journal
On channel assignment and multicast routing in multi-channel multi-radio wireless mesh networks
International Journal of Ad Hoc and Ubiquitous Computing
Computers and Electrical Engineering
| Hi-index | 0.25 |
There exist two fundamental approaches to multicast routing: shortest path trees (SPTs) and minimum cost trees (MCTs). The SPT algorithms minimize the distance (or cost) from the sender to each receiver, whereas the MCT algorithms minimize the overall cost of the multicast tree. Due to the very large scale and unknown topology of the Internet, computing MCTs for multicast routing in the Internet is a very complex problem. As a result, the SPT approach is the more commonly used method for multicast routing in the Internet, because it is easy to implement and gives minimum delay from the sender to each receiver, a property favored by many real-life applications. Unlike the Internet, a wireless mesh network (WMN) has a much smaller size, and its topology can be made known to all nodes in the network. This makes the MCT approach an equally viable candidate for multicast routing in WMNs. However, it is not clear how the two types of trees compare when used in WMNs. In this article we present a simulation-based performance comparison of SPTs and MCTs in WMNs, using performance metrics, such as packet delivery ratio, end-to-end delay, and traffic impacts on unicast flows in the same network.