Solve the Tree Setup Problem and Minimize Control Overhead for High-Density Members in Delay-Bounded Distributed Multicast Networks

  • Authors:
  • Ying-Hsin Liang;Ben-Jye Chang;Yan-Min Lin

  • Affiliations:
  • Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, Nan Kai University of Technology, Nantou, Taiwan, ROC;Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Yunlin University of Science and Technology, Yunlin, Taiwan, ROC;Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Chung-Cheng University, Chiayi, Taiwan, ROC

  • Venue:
  • Wireless Personal Communications: An International Journal
  • Year:
  • 2012

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

The multicast routing is one of the important techniques for achieving multicast applications in wireless networks, e.g., real-time video multicasting in Vehicular Ad-hoc NETwork (VANET). The main objective of a delay-bounded multicast algorithm is to determine the least-cost multicast tree while satisfying the delay-bounded requirement for multicasting voice/video transmission. Several multicast algorithms have been proposed, some disadvantages have not yet solved, including: (1) yielding a large numbers of control messages, (2) yielding dangling nodes, (3) exhibiting the cycle-free problem, (4) increasing the tree setup time, (5) suffering from the tree setup-break problem, etc. Thus, this paper proposes an adaptive distributed multicast routing (ADMR) algorithm to guarantee cycle-free, to overcome the tree setup-break and the dangling nodes problems while achieving the least-cost delay-bounded multicast tree for high density member multicast networks. Numerical results demonstrate that ADMR significantly outperforms the compared algorithms in the number of control messages and the setup convergence time. Finally, the worst case time complexity and the number of messages of ADMR are analyzed, which requires O(n · (m + c)) time and O(2m + 2c) messages, respectively. The analyzed results of ADMR are lower than that of the compared algorithms.