1 / 30

Medium Access Control Protocols Using Directional Antennas in Ad Hoc Networks

Medium Access Control Protocols Using Directional Antennas in Ad Hoc Networks. Young- Bae Ko Vinaychandra Shankarkumar Nitin Vaidya Computer Science Texas A&M University. Ad Hoc Networks. Network formed by wireless nodes, all or some of which may act as routers

shirin
Download Presentation

Medium Access Control Protocols Using Directional Antennas in Ad Hoc 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. Medium Access Control Protocols Using Directional Antennas in Ad Hoc Networks Young- Bae Ko Vinaychandra Shankarkumar Nitin Vaidya Computer Science Texas A&M University

  2. Ad Hoc Networks • Network formed by wireless nodes, all or some of which may act as routers • Nodes may or may not be mobile

  3. Wireless Medium • Shared broadcast medium • Half duplex mode: Collision avoidance, instead of collision detection • Need suitable medium access control (MAC) protocol • IEEE802.11 standard

  4. Traditional MAC Protocols • Omnidirectional antenna is typically assumed. • packet transmission intended for a single receiver may cause interference at all neighbors. • IEEE 802.11 designed for omnidirectional antennas

  5. Directional Antennas • Using directional antennas can be beneficial • interference can be reduced, and the probability of simultaneous transmissions may be increased • Need new MACprotocols to best utilize directional antennas

  6. This Paper Directional MAC Quantitatively Improving IEEE 802.11 Qualitatively Location-aided routing (Mobicom’98 Best Student Paper award) Location-based multicasting Optimizing MAC using location information

  7. A B C D A B C Carrier Sense Mechanisms • Hidden terminal problem • Exposed terminal problem Nodes A and C are hidden from each other Nodes A and B are exposed to each other

  8. IEEE802.11Medium Access Control • Sender sends Request-to-Send (RTS) • Receiver replies Clear-to-Send (CTS) if not “busy” • Sender sends data on receiving CTS • Receiver sends ack on receiving data

  9. IEEE 802.11 • Collisions due to hidden terminals prevented • Conflict-free ACK • Capacity wasted - any other node that overhears RTS/CTS may not communicate

  10. IEEE 802.11 F A B C D E RTS RTS CTS CTS DATA DATA ACK ACK Reserved area

  11. Directional MAC (D-MAC) • Directional antenna can limit transmission to a smaller region (e.g., 90 degrees). • Basic philosophy: MAC protocol similar to IEEE 802.11, but on a per-antenna basis

  12. D-MAC • IEEE802.11: Node X is blocked if node X has received an RTS or CTS for on-going transfer between two other nodes • D-MAC: Antenna T at node X is blocked if antenna T received an RTS or CTS for an on-going transmission • Transfer allowed using unblocked antennas

  13. D-MAC Protocols • Based on location information of the receiver, sender selects an appropriate directional antenna • Several variations are possible

  14. D-MAC Scheme 1 • Uses directional antenna for sending RTS, DATA and ACK in a particular direction, whereas CTS sent ominidirectionally • Directional RTS (DRTS) and Omnidirectional CTS (OCTS)

  15. D-MAC Scheme 1: DRTS/OCTS A B C D E DRTS(B) DRTS(B) - Directional RTS including OCTS(B,C) OCTS(B,C) location information of node B DRTS(D) OCTS(B,C) - Omnidirectional CTS OCTS(D,E) OCTS(D,E)) including location information DATA of nodes B and C DATA ACK ACK

  16. Drawback of Scheme 1 • Collision-free ACK transmission not guaranteed ? A B C D DRTS(B) OCTS(B,C) OCTS(B,C) DRTS(A) DATA DRTS(A) ACK

  17. D-MAC Scheme 2 • Scheme 2 is similar to Scheme 1, except for using two types of RTS • Directional RTS (DRTS) / Omnidirectional RTS (ORTS) both used • If none of the sender’s directional antennas are blocked, send ORTS • Otherwise, send DRTS when the desired antenna is not blocked

  18. Trade-off D-MAC Scheme 2 • Probability of ACK collision lower than scheme 1 • Possibilities for simultaneous transmission by neighboring nodes reduced compared to scheme 1

  19. Variations • Paper discusses further variations on the theme • Reducing ACK collisions • Reducing wasteful transmission of RTS to busy nodes

  20. Performance Comparison • Which scheme will perform better depends on • location of various hosts • traffic patterns • This paper presents preliminary evaluation using a simplified model

  21. 5 10 15 20 25 4 9 14 19 24 3 8 13 18 23 2 7 12 17 22 1 6 11 16 21 Performance Evaluation • Mesh topology • No mobility • Bulk TCP traffic • 2 Mbps channel

  22. Performance Measurement • Reference throughput of single TCP connection using IEEE 802.11 • 1 hop (1383 Kbps) • 2 hops (687 Kbps) • 3 hops (412 Kbps) • 4 hops (274 Kbps)

  23. 1 6 11 16 21 No.1 No.2 Connections IEEE802.11 Scheme1 Scheme2 No.1 1130.42 771.27 51.03 No.2 214.57 1040.21 1303.64 Total Throughput1344.991811.48 1354.67 Performance Measurement • Scenario 1

  24. 1 6 11 16 21 No.3 No.4 Performance Measurement • Scenario 2: Best case for scheme 1 Connections IEEE802.11 Scheme1 Scheme2 No.3 653.64 1250.14 884.82 No.4 634.58 1251.64 867.69 Total Throughput1288.22 2501.78 1752.51

  25. 5 4 3 2 1 6 11 16 21 Performance Measurement • Scenario 3 No.6 Connections IEEE802.11 Scheme1 Scheme2 No.5 179.66 207.41 210.20 No.6 179.46 209.53 216.53 Total Throughput359.12416.94 426.73 No.5

  26. No.11 No.10 No.9 No.8 2 7 12 17 22 No.7 Connections IEEE802.11 Scheme1 Scheme2 No.7 157.50 146.73 165.89 No.8 89.90 85.31 81.30 No.9 22.00 91.39 105.03 No.10 89.29 82.30 82.83 No.11 157.94 153.30 163.37 Total516.63559.03 598.42 1 3 5 4 10 8 9 6 11 14 15 13 20 19 18 16 21 25 23 24 Performance Measurement • Scenario 4

  27. Limitations of D-MAC • Physical size of directional antennas • Unless using higher frequency bands • No guarantee of collision-free ACK • Some improvements suggested in paper • Inaccurate/outdated location information can degrade performance

  28. Limitations of the Evaluation • Propagation model • Model for the behavior of directional antennas • Network topology / mobility and traffic patterns

  29. Conclusions • Pro: Can allow more simultaneous transmissions • Con: Can increase Ack collisions • Need additional evaluation of all MAC alternatives • propagation / mobility / traffic models • Alternatives for determining location information should be considered

  30. Thank You !www.cs.tamu.edu/faculty/vaidya Announcement • MobiHoc - Workshop on Mobile Ad Hoc Networks • To be held on August 11 in conjunction with ACM MobiCom, Boston

More Related