1 / 40

Mechanical Transport of Bits - Part II

Mechanical Transport of Bits - Part II. Jue Wang and Runhe Zhang EE206A In-class presentation May 5, 2004. Outline. A Message Ferrying Approach for Data Delivery in Sparse Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MobiHoc 2004) W. Zhao et al.

dung
Download Presentation

Mechanical Transport of Bits - Part II

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. Mechanical Transport of Bits - Part II Jue Wang and Runhe Zhang EE206A In-class presentation May 5, 2004

  2. Outline • A Message Ferrying Approach for Data Delivery in Sparse Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MobiHoc 2004) W. Zhao et al. • Intelligent Fluid Infrastructure for Embedded Networks (MobiSys 2004) A. Kansal et al.

  3. Sparse MANET • What is Sparse MANET? • What are the challenges for Sparse MANET? • What are the solutions? • Extending transmission range • Store – carry – forward • Reactive vs Proactive

  4. Related Work • Ad Hoc Network Routing: • DSR, DSDV, AODV, GPRS, ZRP, LAR, CEDAR • Ad Hoc Network Routing for Sparse Networks (in detail next slide) • Capacity of Wireless Network • Gupta and Kumar • Grossglauser and Tse • Topology Control

  5. Related Work:sparse – MANET • Infostation: (Goodman et al): High bit rate connection, geographically distributed, discrete coverage • DataMule: (Shah et al): Static sensor nodes, controllable mobile entities to ‘move’ data • DTN: (Fall et al): no control over the network, nodes stay there, hope for the best • Range extension (Ahmed et al): increase range to overcome the partitions • SWIM (Small and Hass): combines infostation and ad hoc networking architecture (has been presented – Whale)

  6. Sparse – MANET (cont.) • Mobility assisted: Proactive, Reactive • Epidemic routing: (Vahdat et al) Flooding (pros: robustness, cons: redundant messages) • Mobile Relay Protocol: (Nain et al) take advantage of node mobility to overcome message delivery • Actively modify trajectories to transmit as soon as possible (hard to have multiple transmission simultaneously)

  7. Message Ferrying (MF) • Proposed in this paper • Two different types: • Node-Initiated MF (NIMF) • Ferries move around the deployed area according to known routes and communicate with other nodes they meet. With knowledge of ferry routes, nodes periodically move close to a ferry and communicate with the ferry. • Ferry-Initiated MF (FIMF) • Ferries move proactively to meet the nodes. When a node wants to send packets to other nodes, it generates a service request and transmits it to a chosen ferry using long range radio. Upon reception of a service requests, the ferry will adjust its trajectory to meet up with the nodes.

  8. Node-initiated Msg Ferrying

  9. NIMF – node operation

  10. NIMF – Ferry Operation

  11. FIMF – node operation

  12. FIMF – Ferry Operation

  13. Performances • NS: Network Simulator • 802.11 with 250m communication range • 5000x5000m – make sparse • 40 nodes, Random Waypoint Models • Single Ferry, 15m/s, buffer size 400 message, route: rectangle with (1250,1250), (3750,3750) as diagonal pts. • 25 nodes chose to send message every 20 seconds

  14. Performance: Impact of Buffer Size

  15. Performance: Impact of mobility pattern

  16. Performance: FIMF: impact of transmission range

  17. Application • Crisis Driven • Battlefield and disaster applications • Geography Driven • Wide area sensing and surveillance app. • Cost Driven • Service Driven

  18. Conclusion • Sparse network • Solution: Proactive vs Reactive • Proposal: two schemes for message ferry • Simulation results.

  19. Intelligent Fluid Infrastructure for Embedded Networks A. Kansal et al. (MobiSys 2004)

  20. What is the paper talk about? • Use of external mobility for improving network performance. • External mobility: Controllable mobility – autonomous mobile router • Network: Sensor Network

  21. Type of Mobility • Random Mobility • Increase capacity (Grossglauser and Tse) • Application: Whale, Zebranet • Problem: Unbounded Delay • Predictable Mobility • Chakrabarty et al. (commuter bus model) • Problem: Usually mobility pattern is not predictable • Controlled Mobility • This paper: External mobility – (for ecological or habitat researches, no free mobile components, these mobiles may be limited in capacity, maneuverability, etc.) • Another application: DTN

  22. Advantages using controlled mobility – 1 • Increased system life time. • How? In paper: Reducing the packet sent (relays – fewer hops) - reducing energy consumption. • More: when you reduce the hop count, you increase the spatial reuse, you also increase the throughput

  23. Advantages using controlled mobility – 1 – Simulation

  24. Advantages using controlled mobility – 2 • Data Fidelity • The less hop it is, the less probability of error it occurs. • Increase quality of received data, decrease the number of retransmission.

  25. Advantages using controlled mobility – 3

  26. Advantages using controlled mobility – 3 • Reduced latency • No mobile router case:Tideal=T(A,A,B)+T(A,B,Base)+T(B,B,Base) • Mobile router case:Tmobile=D(Base,A)+T(A,A,MR)+ D(A,B)+T(B,B,MR)+D(B,Base)+ T({A,B},MR,base)

  27. Advantages using controlled mobility – 4 and others • Sparse and disconnected Networks • Reduced communication range • Reduced energy consumption • Less hop counts, easier synchro-nization • Security • Localization

  28. Processing Platform • Stargate xScale • 802.11 cards • Motes • Packbot (60W)

  29. Adaptive Motion Control - Constraint • Energy limitations • Terrain constraints • Disturbances, noises • Environment constraints

  30. Adaptive Motion Control - Objective • Maximize the lifetime of the system • Maximize the total amount of data collected • Minimize the data transfer delay • Minimize the buffer size • Minimize the recharge time? • Formulate as Optimization Problem?

  31. Influence of speed of data collection • No effect onpackets/second

  32. Latency Sensitive Data Collection • SCD: Stop to Collectdata • Stop at locationswhere static nodes are found waiting with data

  33. Latency Sensitive Data Collection • ASC: Adaptive Speed Control • Move slower in regions where data collection is moderately poor and stop in regions where data loss is severe. • N1: nodes with low delivery % • N2: nodes with high delivery % • T: round traversal time • Delta = T/2 * 1/(n1+n2/2) • SL : encounter of node type N2 • ST : encounter of node type N1 • TE : current time timer expired • Sigma : duration which a timer is reset

  34. Latency Sensitive Data Collection

  35. Latency Sensitive Communication in sparse networks • Propose to use SCD algorithm

  36. Experimental Results – 1

  37. Experimental Results – 2

  38. Experimental Results – 3

  39. Conclusion and Future Works • Controllable Mobility introduced • Advantages for using mobile router • 2 Strategies for moving 1 mobile router • Collaboration between mobile routers • Scenarios where the sensor nodes are moving themselves – MANET

  40. Thank you!

More Related