Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)

1. Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [L2 Final Proposal Simulation Part] Date Submitted: [13 September, 2014] Source1:[Noriyuki Sato, Kiyoshi Fukui] Company [OKI] Address [2-5-7 Hommachi chuo-ku, Osaka, Japan] Voice:[+81-6-6260-0700], FAX: [+81-6-6260-0770], E-Mail:[sato652@oki.com, fukui535@oki.com] Re: [This is the original document.] Abstract: [This documents shows simulation result and performance metrics regarding OKI’s L2R proposal responding to CfFP.] Purpose: [To make a proposal] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15. N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

2. L2R Final ProposalSimulation Result / Performance Metrics TG10 presentation 14th September 2014 Athens Greece Noriyuki Sato / Kiyoshi Fukui OKI Electric Industry Co., Ltd. N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

3. Metrics Based on Proposals (I) • Average Construction or Initialization overhead • Upward route • A HELLO message is sent periodically. (ex. 64s for non sleep, 6400s for sleepy network) • Downward route N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

4. Metrics Based on Proposals (II) • Average routing overhead • No other control traffic is required to probe next hop. • What else… • Source route overhead(only with downward packet) • Xxxxx B (0 B if the storing mode is implemented) • Header size • Xxxxxx B • What mode • We assumed • Non beacon • 4g, 4e(CSL), 100kbps FSK • It can also work with • Beacon, 4e (RIT, TSCH etc.)… • No limitation N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

5. Metrics Based on Proposals (III) • Recovery/Re-discovery • BS down • Propagate Path cost = infinity from top to down • A node which can see neighbor network change the parent • Propagate new path cost which belongs to the new network GW GW Hello Hello BS2 BS1 BS2 BS1 BS3 BS4 BS3 BS4 N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

6. Metrics Based on Proposals (IV) • Recovery time • Time to know BS down • Ex. If it takes 3 hello missing, it results in 3 * hello interval (s) • Time to propagate infinity cost from top to down • Max hop * hello interval (s) • Time to propagate new path cost to belong to new network • Max hop * hello interval ~ Max hop * hello interval * 2 (s) • A node can use hello which is found at early timing and it doesn’t necessarily take hello interval but it may take shorter time. See upward root establishment time (218.66 sec). It takes 1h ~ 1h30m to recover upward route for the 10000-network. N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

7. Metrics Based on Proposals (V) • Re-discovery time • When BS recovers, path cost propagates from up to down. • Less than approximately Max hop * hello interval • A node can use hello which is found at early timing and it doesn’t necessarily take hello interval but it may take shorter time. See upward root establishment time (218.66 sec). GW GW Hello Hello BS2 BS1 BS1 BS2 BS3 BS4 BS3 BS4 N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

8. Metrics Based on Simulation Results / Analysis of Proposal (I) • E2E PDR N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

9. Metrics Based on Simulation Results / Analysis of Proposal (II) • E2E Delay (Max) (sec) N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

10. Metrics Based on Simulation Results / Analysis of Proposal (III) • E2E Delay (Min) (sec) N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

11. Metrics Based on Simulation Results / Analysis of Proposal (IV) • E2E Delay (Min) (sec) N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

12. Metrics Based on Simulation Results / Analysis of Proposal (V) • Number of Hops (MAX, Avg) There’s no significant difference between sleep and non-sleep network. N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

13. Metrics Based on Simulation Results / Analysis of Proposal (VI) • Battery consumption • In sleepy network, 2 types of nodes were considered in the simulation. • PAN coordinator – Non sleep • Router – Sleepy device 121 nodes network N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

14. Metrics Based on Simulation Results / Analysis of Proposal (VII) 1089 nodes network 10000 nodes network N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

15. Metrics Based on Simulation Results / Analysis of Proposal (VIII) • Network Establishment time analysis Non sleep mode Sleep mode N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)

16. Simulation Condition • Type of node deployment • Equally spaced grid • Radio Range • 3 hops radius • Link error • As described in TGD simulation scenario (PER 10^-1 to 10^-6) • HELLO Interval • 64 (sec) • Route Record • Initialize phase: 1800 sec for non sleep mode, 7200 sec for sleep mode • other phase: only at changing parenet • L2R Hop by hop Retry • Yes • Transmission Delay by hop • 10 (ms) • Trial number • 500 times N. Sato and K. Fukui (OKI)