Middleware for
Wireless Sensor Networks
Présenté par Andrei Marculescu
1
Plan
•
•
•
•
Middleware
Middleware for WSN
Overview of current approaches
Classification
2
Middleware – definition (1)
• Context :
– Distributed systems
• Goal :
– Help manage complexity and heterogeneity
• Location :
– Layer between the OS and the application program
• OS vs Middleware :
– OS makes a hardware useable
– Middleware makes a distributed system programmable
3
Middleware – services view (1)
• Middleware can be classified in terms of
the services provided to applications
4
Middleware – services view (2)
• Type of services
– Presentation Services
• Graphics, forms, printing services
– Computation Services
• Sorting, math services, time services
– Information Services
• Directories, log management, shared data
– Communication Services
• Messaging, procedure calls
– Control Services
• Transaction, thread management, job scheduling
– System Services
• Event notification, software installation, authentication
5
Middleware – abstraction view (1)
• Distributed Tuples
– Shared tuple space
– Processes post and read tuples
• Unaware of each other’s identities
• Examples
– Distributed relational databases
– Linda (Yale University)
– Jini (Sun)
+ Information, Control
6
Middleware – abstraction view (2)
• Remote Procedure Call (RFC 1831)
– Possibility to invoke a procedure whose body
is accros a network
• Example
– Sun’s RPC
+ Communication
7
Middleware – abstraction view (3)
• Message-oriented middleware
– Message passing and/or queuing
• Synchronous vs asynchronous
– Facilitates communication between distributed
applications
• Example
– IBM’s WebSphere MQ
+ Communication
8
Middleware – abstraction view (4)
• Distributed Object Middleware
– Remote object, whose methods can be
invoked like local methods
• Examples
– CORBA (Common Object Request Broker
Architecture)
– Java RMI (Remote Method Invocation)
– .NET (Remote)
+ Communication (Computation)
 Control, Information, System
9
? Presentation (.NET)
Middleware – abstraction view (5)
• Service Oriented Middleware
– Services become a programming abstraction
• Semantically described
– Existing services are available through
Service directories
– New services are available through dynamic
service composition
• Examples
– Web Services (WSDL)
+ Information, Communication,
Computation
10
Middleware – abstraction view (6)
• Agent Oriented Middleware
– Agents are the programming abstraction
– Keywords
• Autonomy
• Flexibility
• Code Mobility
• Examples
– JADE
+ All
(complex, dynamic systems)
11
Middleware - conclusions
• Existing approaches are adapted to
distributed systems
• Middlewares tend to provide more and
more services
– Universal tools
– Heavy environments
• Exceptions exist : CORBA for embedded systems
– Agents are used only for a restricted class of
problems
12
Plan
•
•
•
•
Middleware
Middleware for WSN
Overview of current approaches
Classification
13
Middleware for WSN (1)
•
•
•
•
•
Data-centric querying and processing
Localized algorithms
Limited resources
Dynamic network
Application knowledge
14
Middleware for WSN (2)
• New programming abstractions
– Cluster-based
• Resource-aware software
– Adaptive
• Application-aware middleware
– Quality of service
• Lightweight software
– More tightly coupled to the OS ?
15
Plan
•
•
•
•
Middleware
Middleware for WSN
Overview of current approaches
Classification
16
Current Approaches
• Impala
• Maté
• Querying
– TinyDB
– SQTL
• Sensor Querying and Tasking Language
• Generic Role Assignment
17
Impala – overview (1)
• Designed for ZebraNet project
– mobile sensor network
– deployment, management and communications
problems
• ZebraNet HW
–
–
–
–
–
32KHz – 8MHz CPU => 9.6 – 19.32 mW
8MHz GPS receiver => 568 mW
8MHz radio xmit => 780 mW
8MHz radio rcv => 312 mW
1 – 8 MB non-volatile storage
18
Impala – overview (2)
• Classical approach
– Service oriented
• Deployment (on-the-fly software updates)
• Thread management (application switching)
• Event-filtering
• Novel approach
– Resource-aware, application knowledge
• Adaptative
– OS-middleware hybrid
19
Impala – system architecture
20
Impala – adaptability
• Routing protocols switching
– History-based
– Flooding
21
Current Approaches
• Impala
• Maté
• Querying
– TinyDB
– SQTL
• Sensor Querying and Tasking Language
• Generic Role Assignment
22
Maté - overview
• VM approach
– Bytecode interpreter on top of TinyOS
• Fixed-size instructions (1 byte)
• Fixed-size code capsules
– 24 instructions
– Identifying and version information
– A program can contain several capsules
• Operand stack and return address stack
– Highly optimized resource management
• Memory management
• Network management
23
Maté – execution model
Code capsules
Execution contexts
Shared variable
24
Maté – instruction set
• Assembly language style
• Built-in high-level functions
– send instruction
• Default routing protocol : send
• Possible extensions : sendr
– code broadcast : forw
– Logging : log / logr
– Shared variable access : gets / sets
– Sensing
25
Maté – example
26
Current Approaches
• Impala
• Maté
• Querying
– TinyDB
– SQTL
• Sensor Querying and Tasking Language
• Generic Role Assignment
27
TinyDB - overview
• High-level querying
– Well-known declarative language
– Hides the network
• One virtual table with nodes as rows
• Every node attribute represents a column
– TinySQL language
• No neighborhood management
– Global spanning tree for queries
– Requests are flooded to all nodes
 Scalability, efficiency ?
28
TinyDB - example
SELECT AVERAGE(temp)
FROM SENSORS
WHERE TEMP > 20
TRIGGER ACTION SetSnd(512)
EPOCH DURATION 512
Single table
Trigger sound
During query
Repeat query
every 512 ms
29
SQTL - overview
• Distributed querying design
– Queries are injected into the network
– Some queries need coordination
– Queries are processed locally by sensor
nodes
• Distributed tasking capabilities
– Collaborative work
• Moving vehicle detection
30
SQTL - overview
• Meta-language for messages
– SQTL Wrapper
• New querying and tasking language
– SQLT
• Sensor execution environment
– SEE
31
SQLT Wrapper (1)
• Message => (action (:param value)+)
Language
independent
32
SQLT Wrapper (2)
• Example
(execute
:sender FRONTEND
:receiver (:group NODE(1) :criteria TRUE)
:application-id 123
:language SQTL
:content
(
// SQLT code here
)
)
33
SQTL language (1)
• Lightweight object oriented language
• Event handling primitives (upon)
• Communication primitives (tell, receive)
• Sensor access primitives
(getTempSensor())
34
SQTL language (2)
• Example : SELECT
Max(getTemperature()) FROM ALL_NODES
35
SEE
• Message demultiplexing
• Concurrent execution of several
applications
36
Current Approaches
• Impala
• Maté
• Querying
– TinyDB
– SQTL
• Sensor Querying and Tasking Language
• Generic Role Assignment
37
Generic Role Assignment (GRA)
• Self-organizing network
– Nodes
• Evaluate their status
• Agree on their roles assignment in the network
– Developer
• Implement role specifications
38
GRA – status evaluation
• Based on a property directory (cache)
• One directory on each node
39
GRA – role specification
• Every nodes have a copy of the same role specification
• Role examples
– ON / OFF (turning off redundant nodes)
– CLUSTERHEAD / GATEWAY / SLAVE (improving data delivery with clustering)
– SOURCE / DATA AGGREGATOR / SINK (data aggregation)
• A role specification is a list of role-rule pairs
ON :: {
temp-sensor == true &&
battery >= threshold &&
count(2 hops) {
role == ON &&
dist(super.pos, pos) <= sensing-range
} <= 1 }
OFF :: else
40
GRA – role assignment
• Role assignment algorithm
– Triggered by property changes
– Evaluates rules in the rule specification
– If a rule evaluate to true, the associated role is
assigned
41
Plan
•
•
•
•
Middleware
Middleware for WSN
Overview of current approaches
Classification
42
Classification (1)
• New important programming abstraction
– Cluster based
• Distributed VM
• Service Oriented
Maté
VM
TinyDB
SQTL
GRA
Cluster based
Hood
SO
Impala
43
Classification (2)
• Two levels of middleware
– « external »
• Global Internet view
– Identify services provided by a sensor network
– « internal »
• Programmer’s view
– Identify abstractions that facilitate network programming
• Ex. TinyDB tries to merge these two levels
44
Questions ?
45
Bibliographie
P. A. Bernstein. Middleware: a model for distributed system services. Communications of the ACM, 39(2):86-98, 1996
K. Römer, O. Kasten, F. Mattern, "Middleware challenges for wireless sensor networks", Mobile Computing
and Communications Review, vol. 6, no. 2, 2002
T. Liu and M. Martonosi. Impala: A Middleware System for Managing Autonomic, Parallel Sensor Systems. In
ACM SIGPLAN Symp. on Principles and Practice of Parallel Programming (PPoPP), June 2003
P. Levis and D. Culler. Mate: A Tiny Virtual Machine for Sensor Networks. In Proceedings of the 10th
International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems
(ASPLOS-X), Oct. 2002
C. Jaikaeo, C. Srisathapornphat, and C.-C. Shen, "Querying and Tasking in Sensor Networks," SPIE's 14th
Annual Int'l. Symp. Aerospace/Defense Sensing, Simulation, and Control, Orlando, FL, Apr. 2000
Frank, C. and Römer, K. 2005. Algorithms for generic role assignment in wireless sensor networks. In
Proceedings of the 3rd international Conference on Embedded Networked Sensor Systems (San Diego,
California, USA, November 02 - 04, 2005). SenSys '05. ACM Press, New York, NY, 230-242.
Terfloth, K., Schiller, J.: "Driving Forces behind Middleware Concepts for Wireless Sensor Networks".
Submitted - under review, April 2005
Kamin Whitehouse, Cory Sharp, Eric Brewer, and David Culler. Hood: a neighborhood abstraction for sensor
networks. In MobiSYS '04: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on Mobile systems,
applications, and services, pages 99--110. ACM Press, 2004
46