Abstract:

Sensor based wireless networks are the future for efficient data transmission. The key thing for wireless sensor networks is its efficiency regarding energy to be investigated. Various algorithms have been developed to forward the data packets towards destination more efficiently. Here we will discuss about GPSR (Greedy Perimeter Stateless Routing), GEAR (Geographical and Energy Aware Routing) and EAGR (Energy Aware Greedy Routing) to deliver the data packets efficiently increasing the network lifetime. The simulation results are in very favor of these methods rather than previous ones.

Introduction:
Advancements in the electronics and telecom field have brought the optimized sensor nodes which provide batter results, smaller size and can work at any location to be observed. Due to these extended properties, the sensor nodes are future of all the wireless networks for both more batter results and minimizing the human work to analyze the results. Sensing, data processing and communication are the vital components of a sensor. A sensor works on a simple rule basing on components to sense the real world happening, process the data in order to analyze it accurately and finally to share the information using previous analysis. Sensors are basically used to observer the change in some real world environment factors. Sensors are heavily applicable in various military and civil works such as: checking the natural phenomenon, target observation, industrial process observation, tactical systems etc. Talking about the factors affecting the sensor efficiency, energy is the main cause. The battery deployed in sensors offers a limited time to operate the sensor so the need is to apply some algorithm to gain more efficiency by saving it for free time.

Literature Review:
GPSR kind of algorithms is very valuable when the network has increasing number of nodes and mobility in the network. In this method, greedy forwarding is used basing on geographical position of nodes, the packet from originator is forwarded to the node which is geographically comes closer to destination node and under the range of originator. The position of the node is pre-determined by some specific method in 2-D space. The position of node including its IP address called beacon is broadcasted periodically. Periodicity of beacons depending upon the mobility of network is set so as to make the nodes aware of network changes. The key feature of this method is the only need of position of neighbors for forwarding rather than requirement of state. But in some situations like 2 or more ways present for destination at same distance, greedy forwarding technique is converted to right hand rule perimeter forwarding. These two techniques joined give batter results in highly dense networks. Assume the bidirectional radio reach ability for this research.

GEAR deals with energy efficient geographical routing technique to a specific region. Location of the nodes is pre-determined and the data is forwarded to neighbor hood node that would be closer to the node or the cost (distance and energy level of node) should be minimized. Then spreading of packets in specific region of data-centric sensors rather than node identifier is done via repeated geographical forwarding algorithm in a densely deployed area of sensor nodes. Previously assumed that the target region is predefined, energy level and position of neighbor is known and link is bidirectional. Keeping in view the energy efficiency is the necessary for the sensor nodes, energy aware geographical greedy routing algorithm is provided in EAGR. Its very simple in design and implement, the greedy forwarding decision is made knowing the distance and the energy level (not below a specified threshold) of the neighbors. Packet is forwarded towards a neighbor with header including the energy level and average distance from all available. Previously assumed that the sensor nodes are static, incoming & outgoing buffer size is infinite and packet size is fixed. When we try to compare the above mentioned algorithms, we come to know that these algorithms were developed according to the need of that specific time. GPSR was first developed to overcome the problems of previous routing algorithms but left with no answer about the dead ended nodes. GEAR was developed then to avoid the dead ended nodes with sensor nodes increasing the network lifetime with more efficiency. After that a more simple method including the advantages of both algorithms EAGR was introduced, bringing more efficiency towards sensor networks and avoiding the dead ended nodes.

Motivation:
When we talk about the wireless sensor network for successful data delivery with minimum delay and maximum efficiency energy of sensor node is the main issue to be tackled with proper algorithm. Many researches have been made in order to utilize the energy of sensor node in more efficient way including routing the packet to destination knowing the position and energy level of each neighbor. Here in these researches, it is tried to give a batter solution knowing the above factors and the other related researches.

Problem Statement:
Geographically knowing the distance and energy level of each neighbor and also the sensor node energy efficiency value, need is to rout the packet efficiently toward its destination avoiding dead nodes.

Pros & Cons:

GPSR as compared to DSR, DV and LS has much more batter results, it deals with densely deployed wireless mobile networks, and its greedy forwarding decision is based on positioning

information of its networks rather than on the state of neighboring nodes. But this method is not energy aware of neighboring nodes, greedy forwarding is not possible in some conditions and we need to use some previous method on those situations. And also mobile networks need to lookup the location database after certain time to know the new position which increases the database overhead. GEAR uses data-centric sensor net application rather than location database identifier to rout the packet and energy efficient geographical routing decisions are made to increase the network lifetime moreover it routs the packets in specified region by named data rather than multicasting or flooding. But this research algorithm is for static nodes. GEAR was developed for changing network size while nodes density is kept constant. EAGR provides increased network life time avoiding dead nodes including the combined advantages of GPSR and GEAR with a simplified method. But infinite incoming and outgoing packets buffer and fixed packet size are considered for research, limited buffer and varying packet size can bring different results whereas sensor nodes are also considered static.

Conclusion:
GPSR makes immediate forwarding decisions based on known neighbor position which brings about 94% batter results simulation based mobile networks. GEAR is suitable for varying wireless sensor networks enhancing the network lifetime and delivery rate. EAGR is greedy forwarding and energy efficiency of sensor nodes algorithm improving network lifetime.

Future Enhancements:
GPRS can be investigated for 3-D enhancement of network host positioning Implementing the simulation results practically, GEAR can also explored for its coordination with other protocols Changing the assumptions, EAGR can be examined for defined buffer size or varying the data packet size that how it brings the results

Comments:
Each of the three technologies has its own need according to the network available. GPSR is good method as far as wireless networks are concerned but as we stated earlier that the sensor nodes are the future of our networks so GEAR or EAGR can be used for energy efficient routing but as we say for simplicity EAGR is more batter but also we can not neglect assumptions made for simulation are impractical but the GEAR is more practical and it also provide us with energy aware routing with minimized delay is more likely to practicle.