1 / 36

Cross Layer Design in Wireless Mesh Networks

Cross Layer Design in Wireless Mesh Networks. 指導教授：吳和庭教授 報告：江昀庭 2012/5/8. Source Reference.

moriah
Download Presentation

Cross Layer Design in Wireless Mesh Networks

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. Cross Layer Design in Wireless Mesh Networks 指導教授：吳和庭教授 報告：江昀庭 2012/5/8

  2. Source Reference [1] N.M. Salleh, M. Muhammad, M. S. Zakaria, V.R. Gannapathy, M.K. Suaidi, I. M.Ibrahim, M. Z. A. AbdulAziz, M.S. Johar, M.R. Ahmad “Wireless mesh network - Cross layer design challenge!!” Applied Electromagnetics, 2007. APACE 2007. Asia-Pacific Conference on Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/APACE.2007.4603957 Publication Year: 2007 , Page(s): 1 - 10 [2] Arianpoo, N.; Jokar, P.; Leung, V.C.M. “Enhancing TCP Performance in Wireless Mesh Networks by Cross Layer Design” Computing, Networking and Communications (ICNC), 2012 International Conference on Digital Object Identifier: 10.1109/ICCNC.2012.6167405 Publication Year: 2012 , Page(s): 177 - 181

  3. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  4. Introduction • Cross layer networking in the physical layer, network layer and transport layer. • Enhancing TCP performance by Cross Layer Design. (MHHP)

  5. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  6. Purpose • Improve bit error rate and noise between neighbor in WMNs.

  7. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  8. Approach (1) • Can be performed in two ways: • The first approach is to improve the performance of a protocol layer by taking into account parameters in other protocol layers. Typically, parameters in the lower protocol layers are reported to higher layers. • The second approach of is to merge several protocols into one component.

  9. Approach (2)

  10. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  11. Challenge (1) • Physical Layer • It’s not fundamentally different from other wireless technologies. • Network Layer • the wireless link where WMNs are radically different from 3G systems, WLANs and WMANs. All these technologies use a single wireless link and hence have no need for a network layer.

  12. Challenge (2) • Transport Layer • Transport protocol is used TCP on the Internet. Unfortunately, TCP was designed and fine-tuned for wired networks where most packet losses are due to buffer overflows in the routers. • Bit-error rate in wireless • Move and Work off

  13. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  14. Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation • FEBA bandwidth allocation is based on the weight of each flow. • FEBA assigns larger bandwidth to the nodes that relay a larger number of flows.

  15. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  16. More Hops Higher Priority (1) • To solve the unfairness problem of the nodes with a larger number of hops. • Propose an algorithm that gives a higher priority to the flows coming from the farther nodes. FlowPriority = PacketPriority× DistancetoDestination(1)

  17. More Hops Higher Priority (2) • Giving priority to the nodes based on the number of traversed hops might increase the computational load; but that is not an issuein WMN.

  18. More Hops Higher Priority (3) • It’s an example. • Assume same priority for all flows. Throughput increase 115%

  19. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  20. Analytical Justification(1) • X is the transmit rate in bytes per second • s is packetsize in bytes • RTT is the Round Trip Time • p is the loss eventrate, • RTO is the TCP retransmission time out value in seconds • b is the number of packets acknowledged by a singleTCP ACK packet.

  21. Analytical Justification(2) • This method is in favore of the nodes withlarger number of hops; MHHP decreases RTT of farther nodes and increases RTT of closer nodes. Balancing RTT helps to make balance the throughput in the network.

  22. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  23. Performance Evaluation (1) Fig. 2. End to end throughput of the longest flow

  24. Performance Evaluation (2) Decreases RTT of farther nodes and increases RTT of closer nodes ? Fig. 3. Round Trip Time of the longest flow

  25. Performance Evaluation (3) Fig. 4. End to end throughput of the shortest flow

  26. Performance Evaluation (4) Fig. 5. Round Trip Time of the shortest flow

  27. Performance Evaluation (5) Fig. 6. End to end throughput of the longest flow - ring topology

  28. Performance Evaluation (6) Fig. 7. End to end throughput of the longest flow - star topology

  29. Performance Evaluation (7) Fig. 8. End to end throughput of the longest flow - triangular topology

  30. Performance Evaluation (8) Fig. 9. Round Trip Time of the longest flow - ring topology

  31. Performance Evaluation (9) Fig. 10. Round Trip Time of the longest flow - star topology

  32. Performance Evaluation (10)

  33. Outline • Introduction • Cross Layer Design • Purpose • Approach • Challenge • Fair End-to-end Bandwidth Allocation(FEBA) • More Hops Higher Priority (MHHP) • Analytical Justification • Performance Evaluation • Conclusion

  34. Conclusion (1) • Cross Layer Design improve bit error rate and noise between neighbor in WMNs. • In order to improve protocol efficiency, cross layer design becomes indispensable. • Cross-layer design have risks due to loss of protocol layer abstraction

  35. Conclusion (2) • The impact of using MHHP on throughput in WMN is significant, especially when the number of hops is less than 5.

  36. Q&A Thanks for your listening

More Related