MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? PhD Trial Lecture

1. MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? PhD Trial Lecture Erlend Larsen January 28th 2011 Erlend Larsen, PhD Trial Lecture 2011

2. Outline • Rescueoperations • MANET • TETRA • Evaluation • Conclusions

3. MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? Rescueoperations

4. Rescueoperations • Rescue • Operations that usually involve the saving of life, or prevention of injury. • Performed by trained personnel in Rescue Squads • Independent or part of larger organizations like a fire, police, military, first aid squad, or ambulance services.

5. Types ofrescueoperations • Caraccidents • Search and rescue • Air plane crash • Forest fires • Hurricanes • Earthquakes/Tsunamis • ?

6. Scenario aspects - communication • Where • Within existing infrastructure coverage? • Reachable by vehicles? (Boats, trucks, helicopter, etc.) • Moving or expandingdisaster area? (Oil leakage, forest fire, searchoperation) • When • Preparation • Duration • Extent • Magnitude ofthedisaster • Neededequipment • Destroyedinfrastructure

7. Communication services in rescueoperations One-to-one and groupcommunication • Voicecommunication • Data communication • Short text and status messages • Sensor information • Database access • Still pictures • Streaming video • Real-time video Increasingcapacitydemand

8. Radio communicationchallenges • Voicecommunication • Delay and jitter, and to someextent loss (QoS) • Data communication • Capacity • Reliability • Fairness and priority • Partitioning

9. MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? MANET

10. MANET • Mobile Ad hoc NETworks • Layer 3 (Networking) concept • No single standardization body defines MANET: • IEEE 802.11 is a common PHY/MAC protocol • IETF MANET WG standardizessomeroutingprotocols • Activeresearchfield

11. MANET - Details • IP-based • Multi-hopcommunicationwithoutrequirement for infrastructure • Autonomous mobile platformswithroutingfunctionality (nodes) movefreely and arbitrarily • Autoconfigurating and selfhealingnetwork Decentralizednetworking

12. MANET schematics

13. MANET – connected to infrastructure • MANETscan be connected to externalnetworks • Connectingnetworks: • Satellite • ADSL • Mesh • Ethernet • GSM • TETRA • … • QoS-mappingcan be a challenge

14. MANET – connected to infrastructure

15. MANET – Addressingcommunicationchallenges • Strengths: • Capacity for data communication • Partitioning • Weaknesses: • Voicecommunication • Reliability • Fairness and priority

16. MANET conclusion • Originates from computer networking • Intelligence in the nodes (routing) • Advantages: • Independent ofinfrastructure • Lowcost • Rapid deployment • Flexible • Highcapacity • Disadvantages: • Immature • Multi-hopwirelesscommunication poses QoSchallenges • Dependent oninfrastructure to reach HQ

17. MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? TETRA

18. TETRA – TErrestrialTrunkedRAdio • ETSI Standard for Private Mobile Radio, 1995- • In widespreaduse for emergency and crisiscommunication • E.g., thenewNorwegian Public Safety Radio Network • Compared to other mobile communicationtechnologies: • Faster call-setup • Higherspectralefficiency • Lowertransmissionfrequency = widercoverage • Flexibilityoftheworking modes • One-to-one • One-to-many • Many-to-many

19. Schematicsof TETRA

20. TETRA - Details • Fully digital communication system • Supported services • Voice • Circuitswitched data • Packetswitched data • TDMA based medium access • Switchedinfrastructure • (Proposal for TETRA-over-IPexists) • Security • Authentication • Air Interface Encryption • End-to-End Encryption TETRA base station for public safety services in The Netherlands

21. TETRA • 2 modes ofoperation • Trunked Mode ofOperation (TMO) • Direct Mode ofOperation (DMO) • TMO • Infrastructure-based • Single wireless hop from terminal to base station • Access to externalnetworks, e.g, PSTN, ISDN, GSM • Cell radius around 5 km • Maximum data rate: 28.8 Kbps • DMO • Communicationwithoutrelianceoninfrastructure • Terminals sharethechannelusing TDMA

22. TETRA-DMO • 4 operational modes: • Back-to-back – Directcommunication • DM Repeater– Equipment to enlargethe DMO coverage • DM Gateway– Equipment to allow DMO equipmentcommunicationwiththetrunked system • DM Dual Watch– Equipmentcanoperate in DMO or TMO and receiveincomingcallsontheother mode • The maximum data capacity in DMO is 7.2 Kbps • The maximumsimultaneouscalls is 2 (withFrequencyEnhancingMechanisms)

23. TETRA revision 2 • High speed data 30 – 400+ kbps: • TETRA Enhanced Data Service – TEDS • Compatiblewith TETRA 1 • TETRA AdvancedPacket Service – TAPS • GPRS basedoverlaynetwork • Increasedcapacityreducesthecell range

24. TAPS in Belgium (30,000 km2) – numberof base stations

25. TETRA – Addressingcommunicationchallenges • Strengths: • Voicecommunication • Reliability • Fairness and priority • Weaknesses: • Data communication • Partitioning

26. TETRA conclusion • Originates from telecomnetworks • Intelligence in thenetwork • Advantages: • Mature • TDMA offers predictable service guarantee • Disadvantages: • Highcost • Requires planning of base stations • Dependent oninfrastructure • Low data capacity

27. MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? Evaluation

28. Competingtechnologies?- Do MANET and TETRA providesimilar service? • Yes: • TETRA is a stand-aloneemergencynetwork, and: • Thereexistproposals for using MANET connected to externalnetworks as a stand-aloneemergencynetwork. • No: • The differencesbetween MANET and TETRA withregards to maturity and QoS make it hard to view MANET as a stand-aloneemergencynetwork.

29. Supplementingtechnologies?- Doesemployingboth TETRA and MANET improvethe service? • Yes: • TETRA has coverage (partitioning) problems in areas withoutinfrastructure • The data capacity in TETRA is verylow, and MANET couldalleviatetheneed for usingthiscapacitylocally. • TETRA provides a reliable infrastructure for MANET. • Future scenario(?): TETRA 2 withfewer BS extendedwith MANET • No:

30. MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? Conclusions

31. Conclusions • Communications systems for rescueoperations must • Support voice and increasingly data communication • MANET and TETRA may be consideredcompetingtechnologies: • MANET: Immature, butproposalsexist • MANET and TETRA aresupplementingtechnologies: • Dependenceoninfrastructure • Data capacity

32. References • Luca Adamo, Romano Fantacci, Matteo Rosi, Daniele Tarchi, Federico Frosali, “Analysis and design of a TETRA-DMO and IEEE 802.11 integrated network,” IWCMC '10 Proceedings of the 6th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference • Eli Winjum, Paal Spilling, Øivind Kure, ”Ad Hoc Networks Used in Emergency Networks: The Trust MetricRoutingApproach,” Technical Report FFI, 2005 • TETRA Association, http://www.tetramou.com • Dirk Kuypers, Marc Schinnenburg, “Traffic Performance Evaluation of Data Links in TETRA and TETRAPOL,” Proceedings of European Wireless, 2005 • A. K. Salkintzis, "Evolving public safety communication systems by integrating WLAN and TETRA networks," Communications Magazine, IEEE , vol.44, no.1, pp. 38-46, Jan. 2006 • J. P. Macker and M. S. Corson, ”Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and the IETF,” Mobile Computing and Communications Review, vol.2, no.1, pp. 9-14, 1998 • M. de Graaf et al., “Easy Wireless: broadband ad-hoc networking for emergency service,” The Sixth Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking WorkShop, Corfu, Greece, June 12-15, 2007 • D. S. Sharp, “Adapting Ad Hoc Network Concepts to Land Mobile Radio Systems,” Master Thesis, Simon Fraser University, 2002 • Wikipedia, thefreeencyclopaedia, http://wikipedia.org • WikimediaCommons, http://commons.wikimedia.org • R. Pinter, ”Introduction to TETRA Over IP (TOIP),” Simoco Digital Systems, 2008 • JoDewaele, “User Requirements,” Presentation, TETRA TEDS Colloquium, ETSI, 2002

33. Thank You!