Ad Hoc Networking via Named Data

1. Ad Hoc Networking via Named Data Michael Meisel, Lixia Zhang UCLA Vasileios Pappas IBM Research ACM MobiArch 2010 Speaker : Conque, Kim cqkim@mmlab.snu.ac.kr

2. Outline • Introduction • Existing solutions for ad hoc • New direction of networking • Listen First Broadcast Later (LFBL) • Conclusion

3. Introduction • Design of currentInternet protocol stack has a limit to adjust • Mandating that packet delivery is governed by the destination IP address • Reasons • Mobile network is infrastructural-free • Internet protocols are generally built with infrastructure support in mind • Node mobility introduces a high degree of dynamics in node interconnectivity

4. Existing solutions for ad hoc • Existing routing protocols for ad hoc network • Proactive protocol: WRP, DSDV • Reactive protocol: DSR, AODV • Hybrid protocol: ZRP, HARP • Sharing features of the protocols • All features are not suitable for wireless channel using broadcast in nature • Using node assigned its own IP address • Routing based on the single best path to the given destination IP • For crossing each hop, controlling the signal range

5. Failings of the current approaches • Assigning IP addresses to moving nodes is difficult • Hard to cover increasing number of mobile device through limited IP • Not available to fix the location and use aggregation • Considering Inherent trade-off between the accurary of routing and overhead to keep consistent is needed • Hard to decide which node will be the receiver

6. Other solutions for ad hoc network • Opportunistic routing • ExOR and MORE • Delay Tolerant Networking (DTN) • Differences between DTN and NDN • Using unique name that are used directly for delivery • Automatically embracing ad-hoc networking and delay tolerant networking without adding functional modules

7. New direction for mobile networking • Named Data Networking (NDN) • How to communicate using the 3-way exchange 1. Announcing the content name Contents Contents ~/Alice 2. Sending out ‘Interest’ packets

8. Benefits of NDN • Changing the communication semantics from “where” to “what” • Data name carried on the node do not necessary change • Better than both landmark-based and geo-based routing solutions for ad hoc • Facilitating the security development in the architecture • End-to-end cryptographic signatures and encryption helps to make the data security better

9. NDN for Ad hoc networking • Simplifying the implementation • Node can use application data name directly • Interest packets can be forwarded along multiple paths towards potential data location • Routing loop would not be caused, because PIT (Pending Interest Table) keeps track of interest • Addressing and caching fragments of application data • Available to accept the subsequent request for the same file or a request for the retransmission

10. Listen First, Broadcast Later (LFBL) • New forwarding protocol for wireless ad hoc networks • Using variation of NDN`s 3-way exchange • The process of routing using LFBL 1. Nameprefix announcement Intermidiate nodes 3. Data return Listen First Broadcast Later 2. Interest forwarding as a response

11. Evaluation of LFBL • To validate the performance of LFBL, comparing it with AODV on dynamic environment • Using four different metrics: RTT, Overhead, Delivery rate, Total data transferred • Result of the evaluation • LFBL delivers nearly 5times more data compared to AODV

12. Evaluation of LFBL • Characteristic results for LFBL vs. AODV in detail

13. Conclusion • Current routing solution for ad hoc networking has a pitfall in dealing with dynamic environment • Requiring the full or partial network topology for the computation of best routes • LFBL is a new forwarding protocol for the highly dynamic networks