## 6 Conclusions  
One of the main challenges in named-data wireless mesh networks is the broadcast storm problem, which is caused by the forwarding of interest packets. With NDN, each node broadcasts an interest packet received for the first time. Thereafter, every neighbor will repeat the same procedure, leading to a broadcast storm of interest packets. The main reason for this behavior lies in the fact that wireless nodes typically have only one network interface. Thus, interface-based control strategies that are used in wired NDNs to reduce the broadcast storm are not able to work properly on NDN-based WMNs.  
We proposed, in this paper, a set of mechanisms that limit the forwarding of interest packets to reduce the negative effects of the broadcast storm in WMNs. The goal of the proposed mechanisms is to decrease the number of interest packets forwarded and thus, to decrease the probability of collisions caused by these packets. The first proposed mechanism is called Probabilistic Interest Forwarding (PIF). With PIF, high-centrality nodes forward packets with a probability of \(p\). Therefore, PIF reduces interest  
Figure 11: Content packets delivered, average delivery delay, and overhead for eight consumers requesting popular content at different rates.  
packet propagation on central nodes by reducing the number of packets that a central node may forward. With the second one, called Retransmission-Counter-based Interest Forwarding (ReCIF), nodes consider the number of hops traversed by an interest packet to forward this packet or not based on the retransmission threshold. ReCIF also has two operation modes, hard and soft, which are both used to define this threshold. The third proposed mechanism combines the criteria of PIF and ReCIF and is referred to as ReCIF+PIF. The idea is to guarantee that interest packets forwarded fewer times have priority to be forwarded by a node, and other interest packets are forwarded with a probability of \(p\).  
Our mechanisms were compared with both the default NDN forwarding mechanism and the Listen First Broadcast Later (LFBL) protocol through simulation. The results indicated that our mechanisms reduce the amount of interest packets forwarded by nodes to retrieve contents. As a consequence, PIF, ReCIF, and ReCIF+PIF provide higher rates of content delivery as the network saturation level increases and lower average delivery delay. We also observed that some mechanisms are more suitable for low-contention levels, such as ReCIF, and others, like PIF02, perform better for high-contention levels. The main reason for this behavior is the interest forwarding criteria used by the mechanisms.  
We also conclude that our proposed mechanisms are more efficient in scenarios with a higher number of hops between source and destination. For these scenarios, our mechanisms outperformed the default NDN forwarding mechanism by up to 21% regarding the data delivery rate and provided a 25% lower delivery delay. Our mechanisms provided less delay when delivering contents to consumer nodes when compared to default NDN and LFBL. In less and highly saturated scenarios our mechanisms dynamically adapt to provide a higher performance using the shared cache and reducing the overhead.  
For future works, we intend to test our mechanisms in other scenarios, including scenarios that present user mobility. The idea is to test our mechanisms in scenarios where pedestrian mobile users request and provide content using WMNs. We will also conduct tests on vehicular networks and compare our mechanisms with other specific protocols for this kind of network.  
Both authors have the same contribution to this paper.  
The authors would like to thank CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, Proppi/UFF, TBE/ANEEL, CELESC/NeoDomino/ANEEL, and TAESA/ANEEL for the financial support to this research and development work.  
The authors declare no conflict of interest.