Chinese Journal of Electronics

Vol.28, No.2, Mar. 2019

A New Network Coding Based Routing Protocol

for Enhancing Throughput Capacity in Wireless
Mesh Networks∗
PENG Yuhuai, DENG Qingxu, GUO Lei and WANG Fanzhao
(College of Computer Science and Engineering, Northeastern University, Shenyang 110819, China)

Abstract — Network coding technology is always load balance, etc. Above all, network coding is regarded as
employed to improve the throughput of Wireless mesh an effective way to enhance wireless network throughput.
networks (WMNs). However, traditional routing protocols Network coding could extend the store and forward
based on network coding can only passively wait for
function in traditional data process mechanism, allow
coding opportunity, and the routing process is oblivious to
coding operation. Taking into account the high throughput nodes to mix multiple packets from different links and
requirement in WMNs, a novel Coding awareness routing forward as many as packets in a single transmission, which
protocol with maximum benefit (CARMB) is proposed in would make the network performance achieve Max-flow
this paper. The CARMB could actively create potential Min-cut theoretical transmission upper-bound to fully
coding opportunities in the process of path establishment,
exploit the network resources. The broadcast nature of
which attempts to choose an appreciated route with
more coding benefits among available path candidates.
wireless medium makes this technique more favorable in
Simulations through NS-2 demonstrate that the CARMB WMNs.
performs better than traditional schemes in enhancing Wireless routing protocol could determine the path
average end-to-end throughput and increasing coding from source to destination for network traffic. Therefore,
opportunities as well as reducing average end-to-end delay.
wireless routing technique plays a leading part in
In particular, average end-to-end throughput and coding
gain could be improved by 11% and 17% respectively performance optimization of WMNs from perspective
compared with previous approaches. of network layered design. There have been so many
Key words — Throughput, Network coding, Routing researches on routing issues in wireless multi-hop
networks. Refs.[3−9] have proposed some routing metrics
protocol, Wireless mesh networks (WMNs).
to enhance network throughput in WMNs. However, these
metrics are coding-obvious, and they do not incorporate
network coding approach into routing design to consider
I. Introduction
the coding benefits. The motivation of our proposed
As a new broadband wireless access technology, CARMB could be illustrated in Fig.1, which could explain
Wireless mesh networks (WMNs)[1, 2] have been regarded the new opportunity presented by encoding operation in
as one competitive technical solution for wireless the context of routing selection. There exist both of two
terminals to access the next generation Internet. However, flows between source A and destination D. In Fig.1(a),
critical problems, such as limited frequency resources, flow (A, B, D) and flow (D, C, A) make the routing
interference, noise and channel fading, make it difficult to decisions by an independent routing protocol, in which
improve the throughput of WMNs. Network coding tech- case coding opportunities could not be created and there
nique has become hot research topics for the advantages is no coding benefit. In Fig.1(b), it is assumed that there
including increasing network throughput, reducing delay already exists a flow (A, B, D). When node D wants to
and energy consumption, improving reliability, safety and send packets to node A, it has different routing selection.
*
Manuscript Received Mar. 18, 2015; Accepted June 2, 2015. This work is supported by Key Laboratory of Universal Wireless
Communications (Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications), Ministry of Education, China (No.KFKT-2013104), the
National Natural Science Foundation of China (No.61501105, No.61871107, No.61472072, No.61701102, No.61701100, No.61501103), the
Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (No.N130304001, No.N171612014, No.N170308028), and the National Key
Research and Development Program of China (No.2017YFC0805005-2).
© 2019 Chinese Institute of Electronics. DOI:10.1049/cje.2019.01.015
 A New Network Coding Based Routing Protocol for Enhancing Throughput Capacity in Wireless Mesh Networks
If node D chooses the route (D, B, A), the intersection
node B could take advantage of network coding function
and achieved coding gains. If node D chooses the route
(D, C, A), the coding opportunities would not appear.
This illustration can motivate us to choose an appropriate
route with awareness of coding opportunities.
Katti et al. first presented Completely opportunistic
packet encoding (COPE) [10] method, a novel ap-
proach for improving the throughput of unicast traffic
in wireless multi-hop networks through opportunistic
network coding, and given an implementation description
in detail. Although this approach can improve the
throughput, the routing selection is independent of coding
mechanism. Node only passively waits for potential coding
opportunities. Since the multiple unicast sessions may
take different paths which have no intersected nodes,
COPE cannot exploit the potential opportunities to
perform coding operation.
Fig. 1. Illustration of coding-aware routing
To overcome the deficiency, this paper designs a novel
Coding awareness routing protocol with maximum benefit
(CARMB) protocol based on Ad hoc on-demand distance
vector (AODV)[11] . The CARMB could actively create
potential coding opportunities in the process of path
establishment, which attempts to choose an appreciated
route with more coding benefits among available path
candidates. In addition, CARMB could make trade-
offs between routing choices that facilitate more coding
benefit and routing choices that adopt minimum hop-
count in WMNs. Simulations through NS-2 indicate that
compared with the COPE approach, the CARMB could
improve the performance indexes of average end-to-end
throughput and coding opportunities by 11% and by 17%,
respectively.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
In Section II, we review the related work. Afterwards,
we describe the networks model for the CARMB in
Section III. Then Section IV describes and analyzes the
design of CARMB; Section V presents the results of our
performance evaluation. Finally, Section VI presents the
conclusions.
II. Related Work
The concept of network coding was firstly presented
in Ref.[12] to enable multicast networks to achieve
maximum transmission capacity in theory. Afterwards,
there have been lots of researches on network coding
417
aiming at enhancing network throughput, survivability
and security etc.
1. Cooperative coding or decoding approaches
In Ref.[13], Zhou et al. devised a novel network
coding-aware routing protocol to solve the problem of
decoding procedure being completed in one-node only.
The authors of Ref.[14] proposed the idea of cooperative
network coding, which exploited spatial diversity for
improving coding opportunity by making rate control
and scheduling aware of the underlying network coding.
Although these cooperative methods could overcome the
problem of single-node decoding procedure only, complex
message exchange and limited buffer space would result
in long delay for packet delivery.
2. Coding-aware opportunistic routing proto-
cols
In Ref.[15], Yan et al. presented a coding-aware
opportunistic routing mechanism that combined hop-by-
hop forwarding and local inter-flow coding to improve
the throughput over WMNs, which selected the next-hop
node with the best coding benefit and maximized the
number of packets in a single transmission. However,
coding-aware opportunistic routing would incur heavy
overhead and long transmission delay. In Ref.[16],
The MAC-independent opportunistic routing encoding
(MORE) protocol adopted a different strategy for
supporting coding-aware routing such that intra-flow
random network coding was embedded into opportunistic
routing. However, MORE did not consider the issue of
how to increase coding gains when multiple flows were
available.
3. Network coding based routing schemes
The theory formulation of coding-aware routing
algorithm is given in Ref.[17] to maximize the network
throughput under perfect link scheduling. A linear
programming model is introduced in Ref.[18] to actively
change path for more coding benefit depending on
centralized topology and traffic configuration. Compared
with the coding-oblivious routing schemes, the ETX
metric based coding-aware routing protocols Ref.[19,20]
could perform better in terms of throughput and delay,
but computing of available bandwidth would incur higher
control message overhead. In Ref.[21], Le et al. presented
a distributed coding-aware routing protocol for wireless
networks. Based on modified queue length and packet loss
probability, the coding-aware routing metric can integrate
traffic demand, topology information and coding gain
together.
III. Network Model
The backbone topology of WMNs is modeled as a
connected unidirectional graph G = (V, E), where V
denotes the set of network nodes including mesh routers
418 Chinese Journal of Electronics
and gateways, and E denotes the set of directed edges.
We use N (i) to denote the set of neighbor nodes of
node i. The sets of incoming and outgoing edges at
node i are represented by E in (i) and E out (i) respectively.
eij represents any directed link from node i to node j.
The transmitting and receiving nodes on link eij can be
represented by t(e) = i and r(e) = j. A path P is defined
as P = e1 , e2 , ..., ek , where e1 , e2 , …, ek are the constituted
links on path P . We use e ∈ P to denote that link e
belongs to path P . We assume the unicast traffic pattern
in our network model, where packets are forwarded in a
multi-hop relaying manner. The MAC layer is supposed
to adopt the IEEE 802.11 DCF to exploit the broadcast
nature of wireless medium, where each node is set into a
promiscuous mode to snoop on all packets exchanged by
the neighbors. These packets are memorized into local
buffer for coding decision. In our network model we
employ the easy-to-implement and relatively inexpensive
XOR operation to perform coding function.
IV. Design Details of CARMB
1. Coding conditions
Before looking for an appropriate path with more
coding benefits, the most important question is how to
judge the existence of coding opportunity. Nodes must
determine what packets to code together to maximize
network throughput. A node may have multiple options,
but it should attempt to maximize the number of native
packets delivered in a single transmission, while ensuring
that each intended next-hop has enough information to
decode its native packet. Packets from multiple unicast
sessions might be encoded together at some intermediate
hop. But their paths might diverge at the next-hop, at
which point they need to be decoded. If not, unneeded
data would be forwarded to areas where there is no
interested receiver, wasting bandwidth resource. The
coding algorithm should ensure that all next-hops of an
encoded packet can decode their corresponding native
packets. This situation can be realized using the following
coding rule:
Suppose there have been n−1 packets in node output
queue. If the nth packet pn can encoded with these n−1
packets, the following condition must satisfy:
The next-hop of pn is different from any next-hop of
p1 , p2 , ... , pn−1 .
The buffer queue of pn ’s next-hop must contain n−1
packets, p1 , p2 , ... , pn−1 .
The buffer queue of the n − 1 packets’next-hops
must contain pn .
This condition could ensure that each next-hop can
decode the XORed version to extract its native packet.
Whenever a node has a chance to transmit a packet,
it chooses the largest number that satisfies the above
2019
condition to maximize the benefit of coding. Here
note that the coding conditions above target stationary
WMNs with omni-directional antenna, in which the mesh
routers are not resource-constrained. This means that
the memory requirements must be slightly higher than a
delay-bandwidth product. In addition, it is assumed that
the power requirements are not energy-limited.
We denote the total channel bandwidth by B, and
the number of coding flows within a coding structure
by n. In the general coding topology, the upper bound
of total throughput can be bounded by nB/(n + 1) if
the two following conditions meet: 1) Packets scheduling
in transmission must satisfy the encoding condition in
Section IV.1 at nodes S1 , ... , Sn , and the relay node
C. This can ensure that the number of coded packets
can be maximized in single transmission; 2) The available
bandwidth allocated to nodes S1 , ... , Sn and C in coding
topology is equal.
Proof Without loss of generality, we assume ρi
(i = 1, ..., n) and θ respectively represent the packet
output rate of node Si and C. If the average coding
packet number at the relay node is ϕ, the total end-
to-end throughput can be computed as ϕ · θ. Here we
assume the maximal value of ϕ is equal to n. Since all the
nodes in coding topology are within single interference
∑n ∑n
region, we have ϕ · θ ≤ i=1 ρi , and i=1 ρi + θ ≤ B.
Here we can obviously see that when ϕ is equal to n the
maximum total throughput value can be achieved. In
this situation, all the nodes in coding topology transmit
packets at the same output rate. Meanwhile, packets
scheduling in transmission satisfies encoding conditions
at nodes S1 , ..., Sn , and the relay node C so that the
relay node C can encode n packets in single transmission.
Furthermore, we can drawn conclusion that the
maximum encoding number of packets in general coding
topology is upper bounded by O((r/ε)2 ) in three-
dimensional topological space, and O((r/ε)3 ) in three-
dimensional topological space, where r denotes the
successful transmission range and ε denotes the channel
parameter. Due to limited space, here the proof process
is omitted. For more information, please refer to the
literature[22] .
2. Working principle of CARMB
When a new application request arrives at the net-
work, the CARMB begins to look for the appreciated path
which has the maximum potential coding opportunity.
The judgment of coding opportunity is based on the
conditions above. Path establishment includes two main
phases: the routing request phase and the routing reply
phase. Here we shall describe how to establish a path in
CARMB step by step as follows.
Exploiting the broadcast nature of wireless com-
munication, COPE can greatly decrease the number of
 A New Network Coding Based Routing Protocol for Enhancing Throughput Capacity in Wireless Mesh Networks
packets in local network by using the practical network
coding technique. However, COPE is essentially based on
opportunistically coding, and only passively waits for the
coding opportunity. Even if there exist so many traffic
flows, the network throughput cannot still be improved
when the coding condition is not satisfied. Considering
that the throughput enhancement is determined by the
number of coding opportunities, this paper presents
a novel CARMB. The CARMB could actively create
potential coding opportunities in the process of path
establishment, which attempts to choose an appreciated
route with more coding benefits among available path
candidates. When a new application request arrives
at the network, the CARMB begins to look for the
appreciated path which has the maximum potential
coding opportunity. The judgment of coding opportunity
is based on the conditions above. Path establishment
includes two main phases: the routing request phase and
the routing reply phase. Here we shall describe how to
establish a path in CARMB step by step as follows.
Step 1: when source node wants to send new
packets to destination node but cannot look for
available routing information in routing table, node
will broadcast a RREQ message. Before this RREQ
message is broadcasted, the follow information need be
initialized: path information, hop-count information and
coding opportunity information. The path information
means sequence Identifications (IDs) of nodes that the
current node has traversed and some related neighboring
information including one-hop neighbors IDs of the nodes
that establish the current path.
Step 2: on receiving of the RREQ message, the
immediate node would first check that whether the
RREQ’ s ID has been included in path information
records. If it is true, this immediate would discard the
received RREQ message. If it is false, the current node
processes as follows:
1) Update the list of overhearing nodes, and add one-
hop neighbor ID. With the broadcast of this RREQ, the
list is constantly filled in.
2) Update the path information, and add current
node ID and its related information into the path
information records.
3) Update the flow information recorded in current
node, and do the coding condition judgment. If the coding
condition is satisfied, the coding opportunity field is added
by one.
4) Broadcast the renewed RREQ message.
Step 3: when the RREQ message arrives at
destination node d, the coding gains of entire path could
be acquired. In the cache table of RREQ at destination
node, the path with maximum coding opportunities is
identified for packet delivery.
419
Step 4: the destination node d sends out the
RREP message along the reverse path with unicast
communication manner.
Step 5: the immediate processes and forwards the
received RREP message.
Step 6: after the source node s receives the RREP
message, it starts the packet transmission according to
the selected path.
The routing maintenance mechanism in CARMB
is similar to that in AODV. Each node periodically
broadcasts its HELLO messages, which contain the list
of addresses of the neighbors. These HELLO messages
permit each node to learn the knowledge of its neighbors
up to two-hops. In addition, each node announces to
its neighbors the packets it stores in reception reports.
Because the proposal is designed based on AODV, besides
the RREQ broadcast overhead, the extra fields (or bytes)
in HELLO, RREQ and RREP messages as well as
storage overhead for coding function can also incur a few
expense compared with AODV and COPE. Here note
that the coding conditions in CARMB target stationary
WMNs with omni-directional antenna, in which the mesh
routers are not resource-constrained. This means that
the memory requirements must be slightly higher than a
delay-bandwidth product. In addition, it is assumed that
the power requirements are not energy-limited.
V. Performance Evaluation
1. Simulation settings
To verify the effectiveness of the proposed CARMB,
extensive simulations are conducted on the NS-2 platform
in this section. A static 1000m by 1000m topology
region is set up. The distance between two neighboring
nodes is set to 200m. The transmission range of each
node is set to 250m, and the interference range of each
node is set to 550m. The wireless network runs IEEE
802.11b DCF with 11 Mbps data rate. Traffic flows
are randomly generated on arbitrarily selected pairs of
nodes which start asynchronously. These main simulation
parameters are listed in Table 1. The following routing
protocols are investigated in random topology condition:
1) AODV routing protocol (AODV)[11] ; 2) AODV routing
protocol with COPE approach (AODV+COPE)[10] ; 3)
the CARMB. Taking into account the number of sample
sizes in the simulation experiments, we choose 1 − α (α =
0.05) as the confidential level in the statistical calculation.
Therefore, under the condition with confidence level
of 0.95, the confidential interval for the mean of each
evaluation index could be calculated by using the
following formula:
S S
(X − t α2 (n − 1) √ , X + t α2 (n − 1) √ )
n n
420 Chinese Journal of Electronics 2019

where X denotes the sample mean, S denotes the sample Since throughput is one of the most important
standard deviation, n denotes the number of samples, and performance indexes in WMNs, Fig.3 presents the AET
tα is determined by α and n values. performance comparison by varying the numbers of flows
(n−1)
2 in the networks. As is shown in Fig.3, it can be
seen that in the beginning, the AET values of both
Table 1. Simulation parameters settings
protocols continuously go up with the increase of the
Parameters Value number of flows. However, when the number of flows
Attenuation model two ray
reaches a certain value, the AET no longer increases
Transport layer protocol UDP
Channel capacity 2 Mbit/s
and takes on a downward trend. This is because that
Signal transmission range 250m high interference level would result in network congestion
Signal interference range 550m and channel contention with the increase of the number
Packet size 512 Byte of flows. However, the AET improvement by CARMB
Output queue type FIFO is still very apparent in contrast with AODV+COPE.
MAC lay protocol IEEE 802.11 DCF The reason lies in that potential coding opportunities
Cache capacity 50 packets would also grow with the increase of the number of
The number of nodes 20
flows. Overall, the CARMB protocol outperforms the
The number of flows 30
Simulation area 1000m×1000m
AODV+COPE scheme in AET performance. This
Simulation time 100s is because that AODV+COPE only waits for coding
opportunity passively, while CARMB could actively
2. Simulation results and analysis create opportunity, and select a path with more coding
According to the high throughput requirements of benefits to rout the traffic.
various applications in WMNs, three statistical indicators
are adopted to evaluate the performance of routing
protocols with network coding function, i.e., average end-
to-end throughput, coding gain and average end-to-end
delay.
1) Average end-to-end throughput analysis

Fig. 3. The The AET performance comparison by varying the

number of flows

2) Coding gain analysis

Fig. 2. The AET performance comparison by varying packet
transmission rate
Fig.2 presents the AET performance by varying the
packet transmission rate. From Fig.2, it can be seen that
the AET of three routing protocols have shown an upward
trend as packet transmission rate increases. When
packet transmission rate is low, the AET enhancement
by CARMB is not evident compared with AODV and
AODV+COPE due to inadequate coding opportunity.
With the increase of packet transmission rate, the AET
performance difference between routing protocols with
and without coding function is becoming obvious owing
to increasing coding opportunities. In particular, the
AET performance of CARMB is better than those of
AODV and AODV+COPE, the major reason lies in that
CARMB could actively create coding opportunities and
choose the appropriate path with more coding gain for
packet delivery.
Fig.4 presents the simulation results of average
number of coding packets over 50 times running by
varying packet transmission rate. As is shown in
Fig.4, with the increase of packet transmission rate, the
average number of coding packets for both CARMB and
AODV+COPE schemes has shown an upward trend.
However, when packet transmission rate reaches 40 Kbps,
the average number of coding packets for both schemes
starts to decline. The reason for this exhibition lies in
that before the network gets to saturation, both CARMB
and AODV+COPE can continue to mix multiple native
packets into one coding packet and forward them out. As
the network traffic is heavy, congestion occurs and results
in buffer overflow, retransmission, and even deadlock,
which declines the network performance. CARMB can
obtain more coding gain than AODV+COPE for the
ability of proactively creating coding opportunity.
3) Average end-to-end delay analysis
Fig.5 provides the simulation results of average
number of coding packets over 50 times running by
 A New Network Coding Based Routing Protocol for Enhancing Throughput Capacity in Wireless Mesh Networks
varying the number of flows. As is shown in Fig.5, with
the increase of the number of flows, the average numbers
of coding packets for both CARMB and AODV+COPE
schemes have gone up gradually. However, when the
number of flows is beyond 30, the average number of
coding packets for both protocols begins to degrade. The
reason for this appearance is similar to explanation for
Fig.4. Here note that the coding gain enhanced by the
increase of the number of flows is much larger than that
by packet transmission rate, which means more flows can
create more coding opportunities.
Fig. 4. The CG performance comparison by varying packet
transmission rate
Fig. 5. The CG performance comparison by varying the
number of flows
As is shown in Fig.6, the AED performance
comparison between AODV+COPE and CARMB is given
by varying the packet transmission rate. From Fig.6, we
can observe that both of the AED values continuously go
up with the increase of packet transmission rate. When
packet transmission rate is relatively low, the delay gap
between them is trivial for lack of sufficient coding oppor-
tunities.However, as packet transmission rate continues
to increase, the AED of CARMB has been significantly
improved compared with AODV+COPE. The AED of
CARMB is smaller than that of AODV+COPE, because
CARMB actively creates coding opportunity, and looks
for the path with largest coding gain for packet delivery.
This mechanism allows and encourages mixing multiple
packets in a transmission, thus reducing the latency.
421
Fig. 6. The AED performance comparison by varying packet
transmission rate
VI. Conclusions
In this paper, a novel CARMB is presented in
WMNs. The CARMB can not only actively create
potential coding opportunities in the process of path
establishment, but also can choose an appreciated
route with more coding benefits among available path
candidates. Through simulations on NS-2, we can
conclude that, compared with the traditional schemes
(AODV and AODV+COPE schemes), our proposed
CARMB performs better in enhancing average end-to-
end throughput and increasing coding opportunities as
well as reducing average end-to-end delay. In particular,
average end-to-end throughput and coding gain could be
improved by 11% and 17% respectively compared with
the AODV+COPE approach.
References
[1] I.F. Akyildiz, X. Wand and W. Wang, “Wireless mesh
networks: A survey”, Computer Networks, Vol.47, No.4,
pp.445−487, 2005.
[2] Y. Shu, Z. Shu and B. Luo, “A multipath routing protocol
in wireless mesh networks”, Chinese Journal of Electronics,
Vol.21, No.1, pp.131−136, 2012.
[3] R. Draves, J. Padhye and B. Zill, “Comparison of routing
metrics for static multi-hop wireless networks”, Proc. ACM
SIGCOMM, pp.133−144, 2004.
[4] D. Couto, D. Aguayo, J. Bicket, et al., “A high-throughput
path metric for multi-hop wireless routing”, Proc. ACM
MobiCom, pp.134−146, 2003.
[5] R. Draves, J. Padhye and B. Zill, “Routing in multi-radio,
multi-hop wireless mesh networks”, Proc. ACM SIGCOMM,
pp.114−128, 2004.
[6] A.P. Subramanian, M.M. Buddkihot and S. Miller, “Interfer-
ence aware routing in multi-radio wireless mesh networks”,
Proc. Second IEEE Workshop Wireless Mesh Networks
WiMesh, pp.55−63, 2006.
[7] Y. Yang, J. Wang and R. Kravets, “Designing routing metrics
for mesh networks”, Proc. IEEE Workshop Wireless Mesh
Networks WiMesh, pp.1−9. 2005.
[8] M. Genetzakis and V.A. Siris, “A contention-aware routing
metric for multi-rate multi-radio mesh networks”, Proc. IEEE
SECON, pp.242−250, 2008.
[9] S. Wang, C. Lien, W. Liao, et al., “LASER: A load-aware
spectral-efficient routing metric for path selection in IEEE
422 Chinese Journal of Electronics
802.16j multi-hop relay networks”, Computers and Electrical
Engineering, Vol.38, No.4, pp.953−962, 2012.
[10] S. Katti, H. Rahul, W. Hu, et al. “XORs in the air:
Practical wireless network coding”, IEEE/ACM Transactions
on Networking, Vol.16, No.3, pp.497−510, 2008.
[11] C. Perkins, E. Belding-Royer and S. Das, “Ad hoc on-demand
distance vector (aodv) routing”, The Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3561.txt, 2003.
[12] R. Ahlswede, N. Cai, S. Li, and R. Yeung, “Network
information flow”, IEEE Transactions Information Theory,
Vol.46, No.4, pp.1204−1216, 2000.
[13] Z. Zhou and L. Zhou, “Network joint coding-aware routing
for wireless ad hoc networks”, Proc. IEEE WCNIS, pp.17−21,
2010.
[14] J. Zhang and Q. Zhang, “Cooperative network coding-
aware routing for multi-rate wireless networks”, Proc. IEEE
INFOCOM, pp.181−189, 2009.
[15] Y. Yan, B. Zhang, J. Zheng, et al. “CORE: a coding-aware
opportunistic routing mechanism for wireless mesh networks”,
IEEE Wireless Communications, Vol.17, No.3, pp.96−103,
2010.
[16] S. Chachulski, M. Jennings, S. Katti, et al., “Trading structure
for randomness in wireless opportunistic routing”, Proc. ACM
SIGCOMM, pp.169−180, 2007.
[17] S. Sengupta, S. Rayanchu and S. Banerjee, “An analysis
of wireless network coding for unicast sessions: The
case for coding-aware routing”, Proc. IEEE INFOCOM,
pp.1028−1036, 2007.
[18] B. Ni, N. Santhapuri, Z. Zhong, et al., “Routing with
opportunistically coded exchanges in wireless mesh networks”,
Proc. IEEE WiMesh, pp.157–159, 2006.
[19] J. Sun, Y. Liu, H. Hu, et al., “On-demand coding-aware
routing in wireless mesh networks”, The Journal of China
Universities of Posts and Telecommunications, Vol.17, No.5,
pp.80−86, 2010.
[20] Y. Lu, C. Shen, Q. Xia, et al., “ICM: A novel coding-aware
metric for multi-hop wireless routing”, Proc. WiCom, pp.1−4,
2009.
[21] J. Le, J. Lui and D.-M. Chiu, “DCAR: Distributed coding-
aware routing in wireless networks”, IEEE Transactions on
Mobile Computing, Vol.9, No.4, pp.596−608, 2010.
[22] J. Le, J. Lui, and D.-M. Chiu, “On the performance bounds
2019
of practical wireless network coding”, IEEE Transactions on
Mobile Computing, Vol.9, No.8, pp.1134−1146, 2010.
PENG Yuhuai was born in
1983. He received the Ph.D. degree in
communication and information systems
from Northeastern University in 2013.
He is now a lecturer in the same
university. His research interests include
routing and reliability in wireless mesh
networks.
(Email: pengyuhuai@ise.neu.edu.cn)
DENG Qingxu (corresponding
author) was born in 1970. He received the
Ph.D. degree in computer science from
Northeastern University in 1997. He is
now a professor and Ph.D. supervisor
of Northeastern University. His research
interests include cyber-physical systems
and embedded systems.
(Email: dengqx@mail.neu.edu.cn)
GUO Lei was born in 1980. He re-
ceived the Ph.D. degree in communication
and information systems from University
of Electronic Science and Technology of
China in 2006. He is now a professor
and Ph.D. supervisor of Northeastern
University. His research interests include
survivability, optical networks and wireless
networks. (Email: guolei@ise.neu.edu.cn)
WANG Fanzhao was born in
1988. He is currently pursuing the Ph.D.
degree in communication and information
systems from Northeastern University.
His research interests include wireless
communication and network coding.
(Email: wangfanzhao88@126.com)