Routing in Wireless Multimedia Sensor Networks: A Survey of Existing Protocols and Open Research Issues

Table 2

Latency based routing protocols.

Author [paper]	Year	Characteristics features	Suitability for WMSN	Performance metrics	Type of network	Energy efficiency	Network lifetime	Performance results
Zhou and Wang [20]	2010	HRT	Medium	Delay, Lifetime	Homogeneous	Medium	High	Suitable for small WMSNs
Sohrabi et al. [21]	2000	SRT	Low	Delay	Homogeneous	No	Low	Meets SRT
Akkaya and Younis [23]	2003	SRT	Medium	Delay, RE	Homogeneous	Medium	High	Low throughput
Lu et al. [25]	2002	SRT	Medium	Delay	Homogeneous	No	Low	Outperforms DSR [26] and GF [27]
Karp and Kung [27]	2000	SRT	High	Delay, RE	Homogeneous	Medium	Medium	Outperforms DSR [26] and GF [27]
Chipara et al. [29]	2006	SRT	High	Delay, RE	Homogeneous	Medium	Medium	Outperforms SPEED [28] and EEGR [33]
Ratnaraj et al. [34]	2006	SRT	High	Delay, RE	Homogeneous	Medium	Medium	Outperforms AODV [36] and DSR [26]
Medjiah et al. [38]	2010	SRT	High	RE	Homogeneous	High	Medium	Outperforms GPSR [27]
Xue et al. [37]	2011	SRT	High	Delay, RE	Homogeneous	High	Medium	Outperforms MMSPEED [31] and RAP [25]
Ben-Othman and Yahya [39]	2010	SRT	High	Delay	Homogeneous	High	Medium	Outperforms MCMP [40] and RAP [25]
Li and Kim [15]	2014	() FRT	High	Delay, RE	Homogeneous	High	Medium	Outperforms SPEED [28]

HRT: hard-real-time, SRT: soft-real-time, FRT: firm-real-time, SD: service differentiation, and RE: residual energy.