1 / 42

InterMR ( Inter - M ANET R outing for Heterogeneous MANETs)

SeungHoon Lee, Mario Gerla (UCLA) Starsky H.Y. Wong, Kang-Won Lee (IBM Research) Chi-Kin Chau, Jon Crowcroft (University of Cambridge, UK). InterMR ( Inter - M ANET R outing for Heterogeneous MANETs). 7-Sep-14. Challenges & Motivation. Heterogeneous Wireless Networks. Medical crew (MC).

hall
Download Presentation

InterMR ( Inter - M ANET R outing for Heterogeneous MANETs)

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. SeungHoon Lee, Mario Gerla (UCLA) Starsky H.Y. Wong, Kang-Won Lee (IBM Research) Chi-Kin Chau, Jon Crowcroft (University of Cambridge, UK) InterMR (Inter-MANET Routing for Heterogeneous MANETs) 7-Sep-14

  2. Challenges & Motivation • Heterogeneous Wireless Networks Medical crew (MC) Police (P) - WiFi - WiMAX - DSDV - OSLR Firefighter (F) - WiFi 1, Different technologies - AODV 2, Different routings 3, Different policies 2 7-Sep-14

  3. Challenges & Motivation • Heterogeneous Wireless Networks Medical crew (MC) Police (P) - WiFi - WiMAX - DSDV - OSLR Firefighter (F) - WiFi 1, Different technologies - AODV 2, Different routings 3, Different policies How can we enable interoperation among heterogeneous MANETs ? 3 7-Sep-14

  4. Related works (1) [1] V. Ramasubramanian, Z. J. Haas, and E. G. Sirer. SHARP: A hybrid adaptive routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks. In Proc. ACM MOBIHOC, June 2003. [2] Xiaoyan Hong, Mario Gerla, Yunjung Yi, Kaixin Xu and Taek Jin Kwon. “Scalable Ad Hoc Routing in Large, Dense Wireless Networks Using Clustering and Landmarks In Proc. ICC ‘02 • Hybrid Routing (e.g., SHARP[1]) • Balancing between proactive & reactive • Combining two different routing protocols • Cluster-based networking in MANETs [2] • Forming self-organizing clusters • Routing between cluster of nodes  Main goal is to improve the routing performance in a single MANET 4 7-Sep-14

  5. Related works (2) [3] Y. Rekhter and T. Li. RFC 1771: A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4), March 1995. • Border Gateway Protocol(BGP) [3] • Inter-domain routing among heterogeneous domains(ASs) • Enabling administrative control over intra-domain and inter-domain routing policy BGP is for wired networks, not suitable for dynamic topology changes 5 7-Sep-14

  6. Challenges & Motivation • Inadequacy of existing ad hoc routing for MANETs • Improves network performance in a single MANET • Limitations of BGP • Not suitable for mobility • No split/merge • Only works well with hierarchical prefixes 6 7-Sep-14

  7. InterMR(Inter-MANET Routing for Heterogeneous MANETs) 7 7-Sep-14

  8. Design Goals (1) Preserve internal protocol architecture • No changes required in intra-MANET protocol stack • InterMR operates with any protocols (2) Effectively handle inter/intra MANET topology changes, while seamlessly providing inter-MANET routing 8

  9. Main Contributions (1) A new inter-MANET protocol architecture (2) Content/Attribute based MANET addressing • Transparent to split/merge • No DNS requirements (3) Dynamic Gateway Election • Maximizing network performance yet minimizing protocol overhead 9

  10. Protocol Architecture: InterMR Component Internal Protocol Stack APP Traffic (CBR, video etc) Routing: AODV/DSDV/TORA/DSR Routing Table MAC/Link: 802.11a/b/… PHY Interface 0 (base interface) • Interacts with intra-MANET protocol stack 10

  11. Protocol Architecture: InterMR Component Application Traffic and Existing Routing traffic unaware of InterMR InterMR Internal Protocol Stack APP Traffic (CBR, video etc) InterMR Routing: AODV/DSDV/TORA/DSR Routing Table InterMR Table Optional MAC/Link: 802.11a/b/… MAC/Link: 802.11a/b/… PHY Interface 0 (base interface) PHY Interface 1 • Interacts with intra-MANET protocol stack 11

  12. Protocol Architecture: Gateway MANET B MANET A Gateway B2 A2 A1 B1 7-Sep-14 • Gateway maintains InterMR component • Subset of nodes in each MANET • Maintains intra/inter MANET topology information • Propagating intra-MANET information to outside • Receiving inter-MANET information from other Gateways 12

  13. Protocol Architecture: Gateway MANET B MANET A Gateway B2 A2 A1 B1 7-Sep-14 • Roles of Gateway • Handling inter-MANET routing • Enforcing inter-MANET routing policies • Monitoring security and performing authentication 13

  14. Protocol Architecture: e-InterMR, i-InterMR MANET B MANET A Gateway e-InterMR B2 A2 A1 B1 i-InterMR Non-Gateway 7-Sep-14 • e-InterMR • Inter-MANET communication by broadcasting (single hop) • Detecting external topology change (e-InterMR beacon) • Exchanging Inter-MANET routing information • i-InterMR • Intra-MANET communication by underlying routing protocol • Detecting internal topology change (i-InterMR beacon) • Synchronizing Inter-MANET routing information among intra Gateways 14

  15. Dynamic MANET Addressing • Dynamic MANET Split/Merge • Detection by periodic i-InterMR beacon • Unique MANET Address • Generate a new MANET address based on attributes inside MANET • IP addresses, MAC, symbolic name, type of nodes (e.g., vehicle), contents stored in nodes • Represented by Bloom Filter • Guarantee uniqueness of MANTET address • To avoid routing inconsistencies/loops • Simply check attributes of each MANET 15

  16. Dynamic MANET Addressing Bloom Filter(BF) B3 B2 B1 Hash b1 b2 MANET address • Bloom Filter & MANET address generation 16

  17. Dynamic MANET Addressing Bloom Filter(BF) Hash B3 MANET addr B1 b1 Bloom Filter(BF) Hash B2 MANET addr b2 • Bloom Filter & MANET address generation • MANET Split  Generating New Bloom filters/ MANET addresses 17

  18. Protocol Architecture: Routing Tables • Gateway maintains two routing tables • InterMR routing table • Inter-MANET topology information • Bloom filter of each MANET, next hop info. • Base routing table (i.e., AODV or DSDV) • Intra-MANET topology information • destinations in the same MANET 18 7-Sep-14

  19. Protocol Architecture: Example MANET A (AODV) MANET B (DSDV) MANET C (DSR) B3 B2 a1 A1 C1 B1 b1 c1 b2 a2 19 7-Sep-14

  20. Protocol Architecture: Example MANET A (AODV) MANET B (DSDV) MANET C (DSR) e-InterMR B3 e-InterMR B2 a1 e-InterMR A1 C1 B1 b1 c1 b2 a2 i-InterMR BF[a1, a2,A1] BF[a1,a2, A1] next: MANET A BF[a1,a2,A1] next: B1 BF[a1,a2,A1] next: MANET B dst: a1, a2 20 7-Sep-14

  21. Protocol Architecture: Example MANET A (AODV) MANET B (DSDV) MANET C (DSR) B3 e-InterMR B2 a1 e-InterMR A1 C1 B1 b1 c1 b2 a2 i-InterMR BF[a1,a2,A1] next: B1 BF[b1,b2..B3] BF[c1,C1] next: MANET C dst: b1, b2 B1,B3 BF[a1,a2,A1] next: MANET B BF[b1,b2,…B3] next: MANET B BF[c1,C1] dst: c1, C1 dst: b1, b2 B1,B3 BF[a1,a2, A1] next: MANET A BF[b1,b2.,..B3] BF[c1,C1] next: B2 dst: a1, a2 BF[a1, a2,A1] BF[b1,b2..B3] next: MANETB BF[c1,C1] next: MANET B 21 7-Sep-14

  22. Gateway Deployment MANET A1 (AODV) MANET B (DSDV) MANET A2 (AODV) B2 A1 B1 A2 A4 A3 • Necessitate an adaptive approach • Static assignment may result: • Inter-MANET connectivity gets lost with node mobility • Node mobility causes • Loss of connectivity: Gateways are not able to communicate with other gateways • Partition Isolation: A partition without any gateways

  23. Dynamic Gateway Election • Design Goals • Maximize network performance (i.e., inter-MANET connectivity) • Minimize the protocol overhead/ resource consumption (i.e., minimum number of active gateways) • Distributed algorithm • Local decision by each gateway • Become active only necessary

  24. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Initial topology • Active gateways: G1, G2, G3, G4 • Inactive gateways: G5 • Topology change G1 G5 G2 G3 G4

  25. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 1: Collect Inter-MANET connectivity information • By e-InterMR • G1: MANET A, B • G4: MANET A, B • G2: - • G3: MANET C • G5: MANET D G1 G5 G3 G2 G4 e-InterMR Control Message

  26. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 2: Exchange connectivity information • Gateways exchange beacons in the same MANET • Beacons contain the connectivity info. G1 G5 G3 G2 G4 i-InterMR Control Message

  27. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 2: Exchange connectivity information • Gateways exchange beacons in the same MANET • Beacons contain the connectivity info. G1 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D i-InterMR Control Message

  28. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 2: Exchange connectivity information • Gateways exchange beacons in the same MANET • Beacons contain the connectivity info. G1 G5 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D i-InterMR Control Message

  29. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum # of GWs • Local Decision G1 G5 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D

  30. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum # of GWs • Local Decision G1 G5 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D

  31. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum # of GWs • Local Decision G1 G5 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D

  32. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum # of GWs • Local Decision G1 G5 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D

  33. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum # of GWs • Local Decision G1 G5 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D

  34. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum # of GWs • Local Decision G1 G5 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D Active!

  35. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum # of GWs • Local Decision G1 G5 G5 G3 G2 G4 G1 G2 G3 G4 G1: MANET A, B G2: - G3: MANET C G4: MANET A, B G5: MANET D MANET: A, B, C, D Inactive

  36. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum # of GWs • Local Decision G1 G5 G3 G2 G4

  37. Dynamic Gateway Election: Example • Step 3: Elect Active Gateways • Local Decision • G1: Active • G2: Active  Inactive • G3: Active • G4: Active  Inactive • G5: Inactive  Active G1 G5 G4 G2 G3

  38. Evaluation • Implemented InterMR in NS2 • Performance metrics • # of Active gateways elected • Connectivity (# of reachable destinations) • Settings • Mobility Patterns • Reference Point Group Mobility (RPGM) • Random Waypoint Mobility • 100 nodes with 2 MANETs, 4 MANETs • Area: 1500mx1500m, 2000mx2000m

  39. Evaluation (1) – Reference Point Group Mobility • Outperforms Static GW assignment scheme • Guarantees inter-MANET connectivity • Adaptively elects more/less number of active GWs as network topology changes 39 7-Sep-14

  40. Evaluation (2) – Random Waypoint • Network Connectivity decreases with RWP • InterMR elects more active GWs 40 7-Sep-14

  41. Conclusion • Designed a novel Inter-MANET Routing protocol (InterMR) • Handles heterogeneity of MANETs & node mobility • Adaptively adjusts to topology changes via dynamic GW election • Scalable, yet maximizing network performance • Implemented, evaluated InterMR • NS2, various mobility patterns • Effectively achieves the maximal performance • Future work • Various performance metrics on gateway election • Resource balancing, Routing Policy, etc. 41 7-Sep-14

  42. Question & Answer Thank you! 42 7-Sep-14

More Related