140 likes | 150 Views
This paper presents a methodology to analyze the performance of IEEE 802.11 nodes in multi-hop environments. It addresses possible inaccuracies in wireless hardware that can distort measurements, proposes a novel metric to account for errors in detecting other transmissions, and provides a measurement methodology to obtain the metric value. The study emphasizes the importance of correctly characterizing hardware behavior before drawing conclusions based on measurement observations.
E N D
“Methodology to characterize the performance of IEEE 802.11 nodes to be deployed in multi-hop environments” “Marc Portoles Comeras, Andrey Krendzel, Josep Mangues-Bafalluy” “Centre Tecnològic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya (CTTC)” April 20, 2007
Outline • Introduction • A study case: what fails? • Accounting for errors in detecting other transmissions: • Measuring • Experimental results • Using the value in practice • Conclusions
Introduction • Motivation: • A large body of theoretical work on wireless mesh networking has still not been experimentally tested • When going experimental, however, unexpected issues are prone to arise • Previous work has shown that good theory can be too promptly discarded when the hardware being used is not correctly calibrated • The objective here is to analyze possible inaccuracies in the wireless hardware that may distort measurements in experimental wireless mesh networking
A study case: what fails? • Saturation throughput study: 802.11 leads to asymmetry • Theoretical model* prediction: B receives 4-6% of time share • Experimental results:B is active more than 20% of time! • What’s failing? • Is the model accurate? • Does the hardware behave as expected? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- *Claude Chaudet et al. “Study of the Impact of Asymmetry and Carrier Sense Mechanism in IEEE 802.11 Multihops Networks through a Basic Case”, in proceeding MSWIN 2004, Venezia, Italy
Accounting for errors in detecting other transmissions • Active 802.11 node can be in any of three states: • active: sending data • idle: not detecting activity in the medium • stall: detecting the medium busy or receiving data • The maximum data that a backlogged station can send,
Accounting for errors in detecting other transmissions • Let’s define a metric = 1 - Pr{node senses medium idle when it is being used} • Maximum data that a non-ideal station sends • In case we could compute Taccu_stall exactly
Measuring • A scenario to measure the metric • Requirement: Taccu_stall must be easy to compute • Flow 1 and Flow 2 characteristics: • Independent, identical and multicast • In this case Taccu_stall = Tactive • can be obtained through measuring the maximum transmission rate that Flow 2 achieves
Measuring • Workload can affect the measure • If the NUT is not able to handle the data rates that it is required to (Flow 1 + Flow 2) the measure of metric is not reliable • We need a method to detect whether the NUT is loosing data due to excessive workload
Measuring • Workload can affect the measure • A validation curve to detect excessive workload
Experimental results • A corrrect measure of the metric without workload interference
Experimental results • An example of workload interference in the measure
Using the value in practice • Applying to the initial example • There is a high probability (11% in our experiments) that B does not correctly detect transmissions from A and C • Strong bias in the measure • Possible solutions are: • Modify the model to include hardware inaccuracies • Choose alternative hardware or correctly tune the one that is being used.
Conclusions • This paper • Shows how wireless hardware solutions may fail in detecting transmissions from other stations • Proposes a novel metric to account for the probability that a station fails in detecting other transmissions • Proposes a measurement methodology to obtain a value of the metric • The study also draws attention on the importance of correctly characterizing hardware behavior before rising conclusions out of measurement observations.
Thanks for your kind attention! • Questions? Marc Portoles Comeras Centre Tecnològic de Telecomunicacions de Catalunya (CTTC) – Barcelona Contact e-mail: marc.portoles@cttc.es