1 / 75

Exploiting Antenna Capabilities in Wireless Networks

Exploiting Antenna Capabilities in Wireless Networks. Nitin Vaidya Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Coordinated Science Lab (CSL) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign www.crhc.uiuc.edu/wireless/. Wireless Capacity. Wireless capacity limited

miach
Download Presentation

Exploiting Antenna Capabilities in Wireless Networks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Exploiting Antenna Capabilities in Wireless Networks Nitin Vaidya Electrical and Computer Engineering, and Coordinated Science Lab (CSL) University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign www.crhc.uiuc.edu/wireless/

  2. Wireless Capacity • Wireless capacity limited • In dense environments, performance suffers • How to improve performance?

  3. Improving Per-Flow Capacity

  4. Add Spectrum • Multi-channel versions of IEEE 802.11 • Practical limits on how much spectrum may be used

  5. A B C D A B C D Power Controlto Improve Spatial Reuse

  6. Improving Communication Locality • Local communication (among nearby nodes) uses less “space” • Allows spatial reuse among different flows • Improves per-flow capacity • Not always feasible: Application-dependent

  7. infrastructure BS1 BS2 E A Z Ad hoc connectivity X Exploit Infrastructure • Infrastructure provides a “tunnel” through which packets can be forwarded • Can effectively improve locality of communication • Infrastructure access can be become a bottleneck

  8. Improving Per-Flow Capacity • Previous techniques are all useful,but have limitations • Dense networks likely to require further improvements in capacity • Exploit other forms of diversity • Mobility • Antennas

  9. Exploiting Antennas

  10. Antennas: Many Possibilities • Directional antennas • Diversity antennas • Reconfigurable antennas • …

  11. Exploiting Antennas • Need protocol adaptations to exploit available antenna capabilities • Not sufficient to modify physical layer alone • Higher layer adaptation often necessary:medium access control (MAC) and routing

  12. Our Research • Past and present: Directional antennas • Present and future: Diversity and reconfigurable antennas

  13. This TalkProtocols for Ad Hoc Networks usingDirectional Antennas Issues of interest • Medium access control • Neighbor discovery • Routing • Longer links, shorter routes • Longer times to failure • Broadcast-based discovery harder This talk • Deafness problem • MAC-Layer Anycasting

  14. Outline • Preliminaries • A simple MAC protocol and the “deafness” problem • MAC-layer anycasting

  15. Ad Hoc Networks • Formed by wireless hosts which may be mobile • Without necessarily using a pre-existing infrastructure • Routes between nodes may potentially contain multiple hops  Hidden terminals

  16. Antenna Model • 2 Operation Modes: Omni & Directional • Directional mode typically has sidelobes • Not all antennas represented by this model

  17. Antenna Model • Omni Mode: • Omni Gain = Go • Directional Mode: • Capable of beamforming in specified direction • Directional Gain = Gd (Gd > Go) Received poweratransmit power*Gtx*Grx

  18. A B D C Benefits of Directional AntennasGreater Received Power • Longer links may be formed • May lower Tx power, reducing interference to others

  19. Benefits of Directional Antennas • Low gain in unwanted directions • Reduces interference to others • Example ….

  20. Using Omni-directional Antennas • When C receives from D, B cannot transmit D A B C

  21. D A B C Using Directional Antennas • C may receive from D, and simultaneously B may transmit to A

  22. A detour …

  23. A B C Hidden Terminal Problem • Node B can communicate with A and C both • A and C cannot hear each other • When A transmits to B, C cannot detect the transmission using the carrier sense mechanism • If C transmits, collision may occur at node B

  24. RTS (10) CTS (10) RTS/CTS Handshake in 802.11 • Sender sends Ready-to-Send (RTS) • Receiver responds with Clear-to-Send (CTS) • RTS and CTS announce the duration of the transfer • Nodes overhearing RTS/CTS keep quiet for that duration C 10 A B D 10

  25. Outline • Preliminaries • A simple MAC protocol and the “deafness” problem • MAC-layer anycasting

  26. Directional MAC(DMAC) • Idle node listens in omni-directional mode • Sender sends a directional RTS towards intended receiver • Receiver responds with directional CTS

  27. Directional MAC(802.11 Variant) • DATA and ACK transmitted and received directionally • Nodes overhearing RTS or CTS remember not to transmit in corresponding directions • Overhearing nodes may transmit in other directions

  28. A RTS B C D Directional MAC • C remembers not to transmit in A’s direction • C may transmit towards

  29. RTS Issues with DMAC • Hidden terminals due to asymmetry in gain • A does not get RTS/CTS from C/B B C A Data A’s RTS may interfere with C’s reception of DATA

  30. Z RTS A B DATA RTS Y RTS X Issues with DMAC: Deafness • Deafness: X does not know why no response from A • Cannot differentiate between collision, and busy node A

  31. A B RTS C Issues with DMAC: Deafness • Deafness: X does not know why no response from A • Cannot differentiate between collision, and busy node A • Conservative response is to “backoff” and try later ? D

  32. A B RTS C Illustration • A initiates communication to B • While A is busy, C transmits RTS to A • No response from A • C waits a while, tries again • No response, C waits longer … • When A becomes free, C in wait mode • A become busy again, …. Repeat

  33. RTS RTS CTS Data Backoff A B RTS ACK C RTS CTS Data Packet drop Illustration • B initiates communication to A • While A is busy, C transmits RTS to A • No response from A • C waits a while, tries again • No response, C waits longer … • When A becomes free, C in wait mode • A become busy again, …. Repeat

  34. Impact of Deafness • Unnecessary transmissions of RTS • Increased packet drops • Increased delay and variance • Unfairness among flows

  35. A B RTS C Another Problem Performing directional carrier sensing when in wait mode leads to another instance of deafness While C waits to transmit to A, it beamforms and performs carrier sensing  C cannot hear RTS from D D RTS

  36. A B RTS C Solutions to Deafness • Nodes required to switch to omni mode during back-off • C can hear D while waiting for A • Trade-off: C may receive transmission from E to F, and not be able to receive from D, or transmit to A E D RTS

  37. RTS RTS CTS Data Backoff A B RTS ACK C RTS CTS Data Packet drop Solutions to Deafness • Deafness since C does not know A is busy • Make C aware that A is busy • Require A to transmit a signal while receiving • Alternative: A transmits a “free” signal after it become idle

  38. A B C RTS RTS CTS Data Backoff RTS ACK Backoff Tone RTS RTS CTS Data Solution: Tone DMAC • Nodes unable to communicate with A adapt backoff based on the “tone” from A • Think of it as “free-tone” as opposed to a “busy-tone” • A node need only use tone or data channel at any time, not both

  39. Tone DMAC • Why a narrow-band tone? • Save bandwidth • Trade-off • Narrow-band signal prone to fading: Use long enough tone duration • Aliasing, since C cannot tell who transmitted a tone • Use multiple tones • One tone per node too expensive • Share tones

  40. Tone DMAC • Node i transmit tone fifor durationti • fiand ti functions of the node identifier i fi = i mod F ti = i mod T

  41. Tone DMAC • When a node, such as C in our example, hears a tone f for duration t, node C determines whether the tone could have been sent by its intended traget (node A in our example) • If C determines that A is the tone sender, C reduces its waiting time before next RTS • Aliasing can occur since multiple nodes can hash to the same tuple { f, t } 

  42. Tone DMAC Example

  43. Backoff: Two flows to common receiver Backoff Counter for DMAC flows • Another possible improvement: Backoff Values Backoff Counter for ToneDMAC flows time

  44. Packet Drops: Three flows, common receiver DMAC ToneDMAC time

  45. UDP Throughput: Multiple multihop flows • ToneDMAC outperforms DMAC, ZeroToneDMAC ZeroToneDMAC = DMAC with only omnidirectional Backoff

  46. Delay Performance: 2 flows, common Rx • Large fluctuation in DMAC packet delay  Higher variance

  47. TCP Throughput: Multiple multihop flows • RTT estimation of TCP better with ToneDMAC due to low delay variance

  48. DMAC Summary • Deafness aggrevated by directional communication • “Free” tones, or other alternative mechanisms, appear useful to reduce degradation caused by deafness • Practicality issue: • Tone assignment • Fading Topic of ongoing research

  49. MAC-Layer Anycasting

  50. Observation • Network layer typically selects one “optimal” route • MAC layer required to forward packet to next hop neighbor on this route • “Optimal” route selection based on a long-term view of the network • Independent of instantaneous channel conditions at each hop

More Related