Lecture Slides
Download
Report
Transcript Lecture Slides
Announcements
Project progress reports due today.
Homework 2 ready later today –
due 6/2 (next Friday)
Graded HW 1 and solutions ready
shortly.
Third paper summary on ad-hoc
networks due next Wednesday.
Ad-Hoc Wireless
Networks
Main Characteristics
Each node generates independent data
Any node can communicate with any other.
No centralized controller (self-configuring)
Data transmitted in (short) packets
Links typically symmetric.
Nodes may be mobile and/or power constrained.
Typically a large number of nodes
Applications
Battlefield communications
Wireless LANs
Emergency infrastructures
Short-term networks (e.g. convention)
Sensor networks
Medical applications (on-body)
Buildings
Wide area
Cellular phone evolution
Communication infrastructure for
automated vehicles
Automobiles
Airplanes
Widely different channel characteristics,
distances, mobility, and rate requirements.
Design Issues
Link Layer design
Channel sharing (MAC/reuse)
Reliability/QOS
Routing
Network topology
Network management/control
Must exploit synergies
between design layers
Link Layer Issues
Modulation and Coding
Robustness
Rate requirements
Performance
Adaptive techniques
Bandwidth requirements
Typically distributed
Antenna design
Control and communication requirements
Power control
Rate, power, BER, code, framing.
Smart antennas
Multipath mitigation
Multiuser detection
Connectivity
Binary or adaptive.
Channel Access
Frequency-Division
Time-Division
DS Spread Spectrum
FH Spread Spectrum
Frequency reuse
Bandwidth efficient
Distributed allocation
Dynamic channel allocation
hard for packet data
Frequency Division
Fixed allocation inefficient
Hard
to implement when node
locations dynamically change
Distributed dynamic channel
allocation hard to do
FD typically only used to
create hierarchical networks
Time-Division
Fixed allocation inefficient and
impractical (as in FD)
Aloha
Inefficient
No capture
Carrier sensing
Hidden nodes degrade performance
Busy tone may interfere with
transmission to other nodes.
Busy Tone
Spread Spectrum
Code Assignment
Common spreading code for all nodes
Collisions occur whenever receiver
can “hear” two or more transmissions.
Near-far effect improves capture.
Broadcasting easy
Receiver-oriented
Each receiver assigned a spreading
sequence.
All transmissions to that receiver use
the sequence.
Collisions occur if 2 signals destined
for same receiver arrive at same time.
Can randomize transmission time.
Little time needed to synchronize.
Transmitters must know code of
destination receiver
Complicates route discovery.
Multiple transmissions for broadcasting.
Transmitter-oriented
Each transmitter uses a unique
spreading sequence
No collisions
Receiver must determine sequence of
incoming packet
Complicates route discovery.
Good broadcasting properties
Poor acquisition performance
Preamble vs. Data assignment
Preamble may use common code that
contains information about data code
Data may use specific code
Advantages of common and specific
codes:
Easy acquisition of preamble
Few collisions on short preamble
New transmissions don’t interfere with
the data block
Data link control
Packet acknowledgements needed
May be lost on reverse link
Should negative ACKs be used.
Combined ARQ and coding
Retransmissions cause delay
Coding may reduce data rate
Balance may be adaptive
Hop-by-hop acknowledgements
Explicit acknowledgements
Echo acknowledgements
Transmitter listens for forwarded packet
Not possible with directive antennas.
Large delays in FIFO queues.
More likely to experience collisions than a
short acknowledgement.
Hop-by-hop or end-to-end or both.
Connectivity
Determining connectivity
SNR measurements
Bit/Packet error rate
Connectivity control
Link
can adapt to maintain
connectivity (adapt rate, power,…)
Interaction with routing protocol.
Power
increase may affect other
nodes (Bambos technique).
How many connected nodes
constitute a network
Or,
take what you can get.
Routing (1987)
Flooding
Broadcast packet to all neighbors
Inefficient
Robust for fast changing topologies.
Little explicit overhead
Point-to-point routing
Routes follow a sequence of links
Connection-oriented
Explicit end-to-end connection
Less overhead/less randomness
Hard to maintain under rapid dynamics.
Connectionless
Packets forwarded towards destination
Local adaptation
Route dessemination
Route computed at centralized node
Distributed route computation
Most efficient route computation.
Can’t adapt to fast topology changes.
Each node transmits connectivity
information to other nodes.
Nodes determine end-to-end route
based on this local information.
Adapts locally but not globally.
Nodes exchange local routing tables
Node determines next hop based on
some metric.
Deals well with connectivity dynamics.
Routing loops common.
Routing (1999*)
Table-driven
Destination-sequenced distance-vector
Clusterhead gateway switch routing
Wireless routing protocol
On-Demand Routing
On-demand distance vector routing
Dynamic source routing
Temporally ordered routing
Associativity-based routing
Signal stability routing
*”A review of current routing protocols for ad hoc mobile
wireless networks,” Royer and Toh, IEEE Personal
Communications Magzine, April 1999.
Packet Forwarding
Overhead information
Routing information
Packet identifiers
Priority/delay information
Tradeoffs in overhead size
Synergies of routing and
packet forwarding with link
layer.
Other Network
Issues
Network Capacity
Admission Control
Interface with wired networks
Security
Upgrades
Software
changes
Software
radios
Network Capacity
Capacity limits of ad-hoc 3D
networks.
Data rates per node
Number of nodes
Assumptions
N users uniformly distributed over the interior
of a sphere.
Each user communicates with another user
randomly chosen among all users.
Signal power decays based on free space path
loss.
All users transmit at the same power.
No channel separation or diversity.
Interference acts as additive white Gaussian
noise
Capacity Bounds
The total number of bits that may be
transmitted by all users, per second,
is approximately
C K N
3
Proportional to the cube root of N
Lower Bound
Based on deterministic routing scheme.
Upper Bound
Similar formula
Uses convexity
Lower Bound Proof
Sketch
Estimate the effects of interference in the
limit of large N.
Construct a series of cell tessellations with
useful properties.
Use the weak law of large numbers to
prove the existence of one user in each
cell.
Specify a routing and transmitting scheme
using time sharing.
Determine the capacity of this scheme,
which lower bounds the capacity of the
best scheme.
What has changed
since 1985?
Signal processing is better,
cheaper, and lower power.
More powerful channel codes.
Multiuser detection and smart
antennas.
Signal strength measuring
techniques available in radios.
How would we leverage these
developments to make better
ad-hoc networks?
Sensor Networks
Sensor Networks
Data highly correlated in time and space.
Low homogeneous rates.
Links typically asymmetric.
Data flows to centralized location.
Energy is the driving constraint.
1000-100,000 Nodes
Have a common mission.
Very different from typical ad-hoc networks