A Connection Layer Plan for Solid Multicast in Remote Systems

0
0
2658 days ago, 906 views
PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Versatile Computing and Networking Group. Arizona State University. Why Wireless ? ... Portable Computing and Networking Group. Arizona State University ...

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1

A Link Layer Scheme for Reliable Multicast in Wireless Networks Thesis safeguard of: Aarthi Natarajan Advising Committee: Dr. Sandeep Gupta Dr. Partha Dasgupta Dr. Andrea Richa

Slide 2

Outline Motivation Challenges Related Work: IEEE 802.11 Multicast, LBP, DBTMA System Model Protocols: RDNP and M-RDNP Simulation Environment Performance Results: Wireless LANs, Ad hoc arranges Conclusions and Future Work Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 3

Group Applications Search and Rescue Operation Chat Application More Applications … Military Operations Emergency operations Whiteboard Applications NEED " RELIABLE " COMMUNICATION Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 4

Why Wireless ? Inspiration Wireless Network : gadgets with remote connectors speaking with each other utilizing EM waves Ease and Speed of arrangement. Wired system may not be conceivable. Remote Network Architectures Centralized or LAN Distributed or Ad hoc Wired system Base Station 1.Collection of independent hosts 2. No Infrastructure 3. All bounce remote 1. All gadgets interface with base station 2. Framework based 3. End bounce remote Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 5

Problem Statement Motivation To construct a solid connection layer convention for multicast in single channel multi-get to remote systems Reliability can be accomplished at End-to-end: over a few jump. Connect level: over a solitary bounce. Why dependable multicast at the connection layer[IG00]? Permits nearby blunder recuperation. Enhances throughput. Saves vitality. Decreases end-to-end delay. connect level dependability Destination Source End to end unwavering quality Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 6

Link Level Multicasting Repeated unicast transmissions Redundant information, Wastes vitality, Increases delay, Reduces throughput Reliable Broadcast at the multicast address and channel at the beneficiaries Design Issues: Medium Access: Wired Networks utilize CSMA/CD Wireless Networks flag quality blurs with separation self impedance, concealed terminals uncovered terminals, catch impact Error Recovery Controlling the stream of input data Sender 5 transmissions Sender 1 transmissions Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 7

Hidden Terminals Nodes not inside the senders extend but rather inside the collector run Causes crashes at the recipients Collision discovery can't be utilized Location dependant transporter detecting: Even if the beneficiary may encounter impacts, the sender may not. Self Interference: transmit flag streams into get way Capture Effect Picks up more grounded flag the length of the proportion of the more grounded to weaker flag surpasses the catch limit. Motion from Node B Capture Threshold (SNR T ) > Signal from Node G Medium Access Issues Challenges Node B Node O Node G HIDDEN TERMINAL Can in any case get bundle from Node B Node O Node B Node G Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 8

Error Recovery and Feedback Control Local Error Recovery High channel BER Channel bit blunder rate can be as high as 1 in 10 4 or higher. Just about at least 40% of the parcels are in mistake when payload is 512b. Retransmission based [TKP97] ACK based : nonappearance of ACK NACK based : nearness of NACK Explicit retransmission demands : gathering of retransmit demand bundle FEC based Controlling the stream of input from various recipients Battery Anemic Size and weight constraint confine the lifetime of the gadget battery. Vitality preservation strategies Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 9

Single channel multi-get to systems Single handset Infrastructure-based and in addition impromptu Packet misfortune : Bit blunders and Collisions Group enrollment kept up by the higher layer conventions Two Ray Ground Propagation Model Signal needs to more noteworthy than the gathering limit to get the parcel effectively The medium is seen as occupied the length of the flag is more prominent than the commotion edge. Framework Model and Assumptions Preliminaries Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 10

Some Related Work… Related Work Solutions to Hidden Terminals RTS-CTS based : Single Channel Unicast: IEEE 802.11Unicast Multicast: LBP, PBP, DBP Busy Tone based : Two channels Unicast: DBTMA [DJ98] Multicast: IEEE 802.11MX [Sha02] IEEE 802.11 Multicast Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 11

DIFS SIFS X RTS CTS X DATA X ACK IEEE 802.11 Unicast [Com99] Related Work RTS-CTS ACK based mistake recuperation Physical + virtual transporter detecting DIFS, SIFS between casing space for prioritization of DATA Sender H Hidden Terminal Receiver H RTS DATA Sender H CTS ACK Receiver H Update NAV from CTS Update NAV from RTS Others Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 12

RTS-CTS for Multicast Related Work Several collectors : input impact Try to dispense with the crash of criticism LBP[KK01] – pioneer hub sends the criticism data DBP[KK01] – all hubs convey criticism after a specific arbitrary postponement. PBP[KK01] – each hub conveys criticism with certain likelihood "p". BSMA[TG00b], BMW[TG00a], BMMM, LAMM [Shal02] RTS-CTS does not illuminate all shrouded terminal problems[XGB02] RTS H CTS Collision Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 13

DIFS IEEE 802.11 Multicast [Com99] Related Work Not Reliable Hidden terminal issues No nearby blunder recuperation DATA Sender Consume information Group Neighbors Ignore information Others Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 14

Our Protocol Salient Features Protocol RDNP Deals just with nearby mistake recuperation No CTS parcel. Utilizes a NACK or impact of NACKs to incite retransmissions. NACKs don't contain any applicable data. Does not stifle shrouded terminals Protocol M-RDNP Mitigate the impact of concealed terminals Reliable neighbors don't experience the ill effects of concealed terminals the length of sender is transmitting Forces directing layer to fabricate courses just utilizing dependable neighbors Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 15

DIFS SIFS Protocol RDNP Protocol Good for remote LANs when there are no concealed terminals base station is the main hub that can transmit multicast information. Not all that great for specially appointed systems in light of shrouded terminals. RTS DATA Sender NACK Group Neighbors Without bundle Update NAV from RTS Others & Group Neighbors With parcel Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 16

CSI CS RX RL Reliable and Interference Region Protocol Reception run: Radius inside which the flag is more noteworthy than the gathering limit Noise Range: Radius inside which the flag is more noteworthy than the commotion edge Hey! I can't transmit. I am inside A's clamor go Hey! I can transmit. I am not inside A's clamor go Reliable Neighbors: All neighbors inside the crash free zone. Inconsistent Neighbors: All neighbors not in the dependable range Node A Node B1 Node B2 Node C1 Node C2 Booo Hooo! I encounter crashes Yippee! Regardless I get A's flag Thanks to catch impact. Portable Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 17

Minimum Reliable Radius Protocol Minimum RL ≈ 170m when CS = 550m Assumption: No two hubs "begin" transmitting all the while. Two concurrent transmissions must be isolated from each other by a separation of CS Around a sender the greatest number of hubs which can transmit at the same time is 6 Node E Node F CS d ER d FR CS Node R d AR d DR d Node D Φ RL CS Node A Node S d CR d BR Node C Node B Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 18

Protocol M-RDNP Protocol Force all courses to be shaped utilizing just dependable neighbors. Subsequently transmissions utilize just solid bounces in which there are no concealed terminal issues. Might utilize more number of jumps to transmit to a similar hub Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 19

An illustration Protocol RL ≈ 170 m Routes utilizing IEEE 802.11 and RDNP at the MAC layer Routes utilizing M-RDNP at the MAC layer 1 2 3 Number of bounces = 4 Number of bounces = 6 Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 20

Simulation Environment Results Network Simulator [Net02] Performance Metrics Average Packet Drop Ratio per Node = Average Energy Consumed per Node per parcel = Wireless LANs: IEEE 802.11, LBP, DBP, PBP, RDNP Ad hoc organizes Routing Layer: SPST [GBS00], SPST [Sri03] superior to M-AODV, ODMRP, MST IEEE 802.11, RDNP, M-RDNP All recreation focuses arrived at the midpoint of more than 45 runs Accuracy 5% certainty interim 99% [Jai91] Number of bundles dropped per hub Number of bundles sent Energy devoured per hub Number of parcels recv Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 21

2 4 3 1 4 1 With Unicast movement AVG DROP RATIO NUMBER OF NODES Simulation Results – Wireless LANs Results Stationary hubs Mobile hubs AVG DROP RATIO AVG DROP RATIO BER (X 10e5) BER (X 10e5) Stationary hubs with unequivocal retransmission demands END-TO-END DELAY BER (X 10e5) Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 22

2 3 2 1 Simulation - Stationary Ad Hoc arranges Results Nodes = 10, Avg. neighbor thickness ≈ 4 , 3 Nodes = 20, Avg. neighbor thickness ≈ 6 , 4 AVG DROP RATIO AVG DROP RATIO BER (X 10e5) BER (X 10e5) Nodes = 30, Avg. neighbor thickness ≈ 8 , 5 Nodes = 40, Avg. neighbor thickness ≈ 10 , 6 AVG DROP RATIO AVG DROP RATIO 3 BER (X 10e5) BER (X 10e5) Mobile Computing and Networking Group Arizona State University

Slide 23

3 2 1 3 Simulation – MANETs Results Nodes = 30, Low BER Nodes = 10, Low BER AVG DROP RATIO AVG DROP RATIO Speed (m/s) Speed (m/s) Nodes = 10, High BER Nodes

SPONSORS