1 / 8

MESA Ad-Hoc Session, Copenhagen, Sept. 27, 2002

MESA Ad-Hoc Session, Copenhagen, Sept. 27, 2002. Research Interests in Mobile Broadband Ad-Hoc Networks Bernhard Walke, Peter Sievering Aachen University RWTH, www.comnets.rwth-aachen.de CONTACT: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Bernhard Walke Kopernikusstrasse 16, 52074 Aachen, Germany

sanne
Download Presentation

MESA Ad-Hoc Session, Copenhagen, Sept. 27, 2002

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. MESA Ad-Hoc Session, Copenhagen, Sept. 27, 2002 Research Interests in Mobile Broadband Ad-Hoc Networks Bernhard Walke, Peter Sievering Aachen University RWTH, www.comnets.rwth-aachen.de CONTACT: Prof. Dr.-Ing. Bernhard Walke Kopernikusstrasse 16, 52074 Aachen, Germany E-mail: Walke@ComNets.RWTH-Aachen.de Phone: +49 241 80 27910, Fax: +49 241 80 22242

  2. ComNets Research Group Chair of Communication Networks (ComNets) Prof. Dr.-Ing. Bernhard Walke Faculty: Electrical & Information Engineering Aachen University (RWTH), Germany • 38 scientific assistants (fully employed) • 40 to 50 students assistants (part time jobs) • 35 master theses in 2001 • > 45 scientific publications per year • 600 – 800 ComNets paper downloads per month • Partner in currently 7 European Research Projects: VIRTUOS, FUTURE, DRIVE/OVERDRIVE, IPonAir, STRIKE, SAILOR, WWRI Chair WG 4: New Radio Technologies In: Wireless World Research Forum (WWRF)

  3. Areas of Interest to contribute (1) MESA goals: • Connectivity irrespective of time and place, incl. operation in areas where public telecommunication infrastructure has been partially destroyed or is overloaded • High level of mobility • “Always best connected” Proposed research contributions • Ad hoc multihop wireless broadband system design • Integration of broadband wireless networks into terrestrial cellular radio networks • Integration of broadband wireless networks into satellite systems

  4. Areas of Interest to contribute (2) 4. System Comparison/Evaluation based on Tools and Scenarios • ComNets has its own unique tools for system level performance evaluation. • The most important system level simulators are • GPRSim: GPRS/EDGE systems • URIS: UMTS radio interface protocol simulator • MOSS: Mobile satellite systems • TETRIS: TETRA radio interface protocol simulator • WARP2: IEEE 802.11a/b/e and HiperLAN/2 protocols • W-CHAMBSim: ComNets Broadband WLAN designed for MESA • GOOSE: Combined link and system level simulator for GSM/(E)GPRS, TETRA, UMTS, WLAN Envisaged effort: 4 man-years per year over project duration

  5. System Level Simulation Environment ADTs - Random Generator - Statistical Evaluation • Simulation Parameter • other Protocols formally specified in SDL Y X SDL2SPEETCL SPEET = SDL Performance Evaluation Environment and Tools SPEET Class Library

  6. Example Analysis: One Hop Scenario Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet Fixed core network N-ISDN Ethernet AP MPEG Ethernet Ethernet Ethernet • MPEG download video stream (5 Mb/s), the packet sizes are read from the trace file. • One duplex N-ISDN connection (64 kb/s) • Eight terminals exchanging Ethernet packets in a circular way, the Ethernet packet sizes are read from the trace file. Date rates are varied to model different loads. • The transmission rates of HiperLAN/2, IEEE 802.11a and W-CHAMB are 27 Mb/s, 24Mb/s and 24Mb/s, respectively • PCF is used in IEEE 802.11a to serve the MPEG and N-ISDN services. RTS/CTS threshold of DCF is 500 bytes. Ethernet

  7. One Hop Traffic Performance Results • The prioritized services N-ISDN and MPEG are served completely under the all load conditions. • The maximum throughput of W-CHAMB for the Ethernet service is a little lower than that of H/2, but significantly higher than that of IEEE 802.11a. • W-CHAMB is able to guarantee QoS for N-ISDN and MPEG services without a central control. • H/2 has the best traffic performance in this one hop scenario. • IEEE 802.11a can support QoS for real time traffic with its PCF that functions only in a fully connected network.

  8. Some Published Work on MESA Related Subjects • M. Lott, B. Walke: Performance Analysis of a Wireless Ad hoc Network with QoS Support, Telecommunication Systems, Vol. 16, 2001 • B. Walke, B. Xu: A New Air Interface Concept for Wireless Multimedia Communications beyond the 3rd Generation, In Proc. IEEE WPMC, Aalborg, Sept. 2001 • B. Walke, B. Xu: On the MAC Performance of Self-organizing Broadband Multihop Multimedia Wireless, In Proc. IEEE VTC, Atlantic City, Oct. 2001 • B. Walke, B. Xu: Design Issues of Self-organizing Broadband Wireless Networks, Computer Networks, Vol. 21, 2001 • B. Xu, B. Walke: W-CHAMB: A Wireless Channel Oriented Ad-hoc Multihop Broadband Network - Comparison with IEEE 802.11, In Proc. European Wireless, Munich, Oct. 1999 • M. Lott: Random Access for Wireless Ad hoc Broadband Networks, In Proc. European Wireless, Munich, Oct. 1999 • M. Lott, B. Walke: Performance of the Wireless Ad hoc Network W-CHAMB, In Proc. European Wireless, Munich, Oct. 1999 • B. Xu, B. Walke: Connection Control and Mobility Management in an Ad-hoc Wireless ATM Multihop LAN, In Proc. PIMRC'99, Osaka, Sept. 1999 • M. Lott, B. Walke: Performance analysis of a Wireless Ad hoc Network with QoS Support, In Proc. SPECTS '99, Chicago, July 1999

More Related