Architecture & Protocols for Supporting Routing & QoS in MANET

1. Architecture & Protocols for Supporting Routing & QoS in MANET Navid NIKAEIN http://www.eurecom.fr/~nikaeinn

2. Outline • Introduction • Motivation • Topology Management • Route Determination • Quality of Service Support • Architecture • Conclusion and Open Issues

3. Issues in MANET • Mobile ad hoc networks: • Wireless  broadcasting  collision • Mobility  time-varying resources link Failure • Lack of infrastructure  fully-distributed  Complex • Small devices  limited resources multihop routing • Topology Management, Routing, and QoS

4. Topology of MANET Y Z S E F B C M L J A G H D K I N Represents a node that has received packet P Represents that connected nodes are within each other’s transmission range

5. Motivation Y Broadcast transmission Z S E F B C M L J A G H D K I N Represents a node that receives packet P for the first time Represents transmission of packet P

6. Motivation Y Z S E F B C M L J A G H D K I N

7. Motivation Y Z S E F B C M L J A G H D K I N Generate redundant and unnecessary information

8. Motivation Y Z S E F B C M L J A G H D K I N Transmissions may collide Packet P may not be delivered to node D at all, despite the use of flooding

9. Motivation Y Z S E F B C M L J A G H D K I N • Flooding generates: • Redundant and unnecessary information • Collision

10. Related Work-Topology Management Topology Management Pb. Minimum dominating set NP-hard Power Control Clustering Non-deterministic Deterministic • DDR • TEMPO • e.g. Lowest ID, • Max Degree • Core-extraction & • Spanning-tree algorithms

11. Topology Management • DDR- Distributed Dynamic Routing Algorithm [2,3] • Intuition • Preferred neighbor election • Forest Construction • Zone Partitioning • Simulation Model • Performance Results • Summary

12. Intuition Network Topology Criteria BEACON Forest TREE TREE …. TREE BEACON ZONE ZONE …. ZONE Time

13. Preferred Neighbor Election • Each node selects a neighbor, called preferred neighbor, that has the maximum degree of connectivity • If identical degrees, select the one with the higher ID PNx={y | yNx  label(y) = Max(deg(Nx) | NID) } 2 1 c 5 h 4 f b g 3 d 4 e a 2 3 2 1 c 5 h 4 f b g 3 d 4 e a 3

14. Forest Construction • Theorem: Connecting each node to its preferred neighbor yields to a forest[2] • Mechanism: Beaconing c h f b g d e a c h f b g d e a Forest limits the number of forwarding nodes, which reduces theredundant and unnecessary information as well as the probability of collision

15. Zone Partitioning • Zone Tree • Maintained Proactively Connected Dominating Set z2 c h c h d DDR g d g w b w k b k x v z a x v z f a y f z1 y u s t s u i n t e n i e z3 • Zones : • Improves delay performance • Contributes in protocol scalability

16. Criteria for FC [4]:Quality of Connectivity (QoC) • Buffer level b unallocated buffer • Stability level s • QoC =  b+  s • PNx={y | yNx  label(y) = Max(QoC(Nx) | NID) } • The PNs belong to the set of high quality nodes

17. Protocol Model • To study the effect of the proposed topology management on routing performance ? • Hybrid Ad Hoc Routing Protocol (HARP) [5] • Discover the shortest path • Establish forward and reverse path

18. Traffic model: CBR 512 byte/packet 4 packets/second Source 10, 20, 30 Performance Metrics: Packet delivery fraction Avg. E2E delay Routing overhead Movement model: Random way point [Yoon] 50 nodes 1500mx300m 0-20 m/s (or 1-20m/s) 900 simulated seconds Pause time=0, 30, 60, 150, 300, 600, 900 10 scenarios for each pause time Beaconing: 10 s QoC = 2 s + b Simulation Model [Johansson, Perkins, Broach]

19. Packet Delivery Fraction • Simple routing has a slightly better PDF in low traffic load • Routing+TM outperforms simple routing up to 20% as the traffic load increases 10 sources 30 sources 20 sources

20. Avg. E2E Delay • Routing +TM significantly improves the delay performance up to 200ms as the network conditions become stressful • Shortest path is not enough 10 sources 20 sources 30 sources

21. Routing Overhead (pkt) • Simple Routing outperforms Routing+TM in low/medium traffic load • Most of the packets produced by Routing+TM are the beacons 10 sources 20 sources 30 sources

22. Routing Overhead (bytes) • Simple Routing outperforms Routing+TM in low/medium traffic load 10 sources 30 sources 20 sources

23. Summary

24. Motivation for Route Selection • The effect of mobility rate and traffic load on DELAY • Issue: load balancing • Adjusting the weight of QoC solves the problem of load balancing within a zone Load Balancing 10 sources 20 sources 30 sources

25. Routing Issues • Dilemma at a node: “Do I keep track of routes to all destinations, or instead keep track of only those that are of immediateinterest?” • Three strategies: • Proactive: keep track of all routes. • Reactive: only those routes of immediate interest. • Hybrid:partial proactive / partial reactive.

26. Related Work-Routing Ad Hoc Routing Topology-based Position-based Proactive Hybrid Proactive Reactive Hybrid Reactive OLSR TBRPF DSDV WRP CGSR FSH-HSR LANMAR DSR AODV RDMAR ABR SSR TORA ZHLS ZRP CBRP HARP LAR DREAM Terminodes GLS ALM

27. Route Determination [5,6] • HARP- Hybrid Ad Hoc Routing Protocol [5,6] • Intra-zone and Inter-zone routing • Relative distance estimation [Aggelou, Tafazolli] • Quality of service support • Performance Results [Osafune] • Summary

28. HARP: Hybrid Routing Intra-zone Routing Inter-zone Routing z2 c h src zone d g Z2 b w Z1 k Zone abstraction x v z a f z1 y Z4 Z3 u s t n dst zone i e z3 r m - Zone level routing z4 Shortcut intra-zone routing

29. Mechanisms to Achieve Load Balancing • Inter-zone routing: route selection is done at the destination • Load balancing requires: • A set of route candidates • A set of route metrics • Issues: • Congestion • Single route metric • Proposed mechanisms : • Relative distance estimation • Quality of service metrics

30. Relative Distance Estimation Offset= mobility x elapsed time SRC DST … dx R Dst Offset Src Offset RD_Offset

31. Relative Distance Estimation Offset= mobility x elapsed time SRC DST … dx R Src Offset Path_offset RD_Offset

32. Query Localization Technique • if (rd(x,dst)>rd(src,d)) • Drop PREQ; • else if (rd(x,dst)<TTL) • TTL=rd(x,dst); d=k x … PREQ d=3 PREQ src d=2 x d=1 dst

33. Quality of Service Support [7] Application QoS Network QoC QoC Legend QoS Service h: hop count r : buffer size b : buffer occupancy c : nodes’ throughput s : stability h.(r-b)/c Delay 1st Class c/(2h.(r-b)) Throughput 2nd Class 1/s 3rd Class Best-Effort

34. Traffic model: CBR 512 byte/packet 4 packets/second Source 10, 20, 30 Performance Metrics: Packet delivery fraction Avg. E2E delay Routing overhead Movement model: Random way point [Yoon] 50 nodes 1500mx300m 0-20 m/s (or 1-20m/s) 900 simulated seconds Pause time=0, 30, 60, 150, 300, 600, 900 10 scenarios for each pause time Simulation Model [Johansson, Perkins, Broach]

35. Packet Delivery Fraction • The effect of mobility and traffic load is not uniform • Congestion stems from the lack of load balancing in the protocols 30 sources 20 sources 10 sources

36. Avg. E2E Delay • The effect of traffic load and mobility on the delay performance is non-uniform • Load balancing : • weight of QoC • Relative distance estimation 10 sources 20 sources 30 sources

37. Avg. E2E Delay • Delay performance has significant improved • QoS metrics is the key factor for load balancing effect 10 sources 20 sources 30 sources

38. Packet Delivery Fraction • QoS metrics has no significant effect on PDF • Route discovery and route maintenance are the key factors for improving PDF • Deal with Traffic load/pattern and mobility model/rate 10 sources 20 sources 30 sources

39. Summary

40. Architecture • AN ARCHITECTURE THAT SEPARATES [1]: • Route Determination • With respect to Application requirements Application HARP DDR Network QoS Classes QoS: Delay TPut BE Network Quality QoC: Power, buffer Stability • Topology Management • With respect to Quality of Network

41. Conclusion • Topology management improves routing • Load balancing • HARP  QoS metrics and RDE • DDR  QoC metrics • Control flooding overhead • Forest  redundancy & collision • Relative distance estimation  scope • Scalability and delay performance  zone abstraction

42. Conclusion • Routing requires: • Adaptive topology management • Load balancing • Congestion avoidance mechanisms • Neighboring information • Factors affecting routing performance • Network size, mobility rate and model, traffic load and pattern, network density • Traffic locality vs. network size

43. Future Work • Optimal criteria of forest Construction • Introduce an adaptive routing mechanisms • Effect of the factors affecting routing performance

44. Publications [1] N. Nikaein and C. Bonnet, “An Architecture for Improving Routing and Network Performance in Mobile Ad Hoc Network”, Kluwer/ACM MONET, 2003. [2] N. Nikaein, H. Labiod, and C. Bonnet, “DDR-- Distributed Dunamic Routing Algorithm for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks”, MobiHoc, 2000. [3] N. Nikaein, S. Wu, C. Bonnet and H. Labiod, “Designing Routing Protocol for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks”, DNAC, 2000. [4] N. Nikaein and C. Bonnet, “ Improving Routing and Network Performance in MANET using Quality of Nodes”, WiOpt, 2003

45. Publications [5]Navid Nikaein, C. Bonnet and Neda Nikaein, “HARP- Hybrid Ad Hoc Routing Protocol ”, IST, 2001. [6] Navid Nikaein, C. Bonnet, N. Akhtar and R. Tafazolli, “HARP-v2 Hybrid Ad Hoc Routing Protocol ”, To be submitted, 2003. [7] N. Nikaein and C. Bonnet, “A Glance at Quality of Service models in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks”,DNAC, 2002. [8] N. Nikaein, C. Bonnet, Y. Moret and I. A. Rai, “LQoS- Layered Quality of Service Model for Routing in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks”, SCI, 2002. [9] N. Nikaein and C. Bonnet, “ALM-- Adaptive Location Management Model Incorporating Fuzzy Logic For Mobile Ad Hoc Networks ”, Med-Hoc-Net, 2002.

46. References [Wu] DDR-Based Multicast Protocol with Dynamic Core (DMPDC), PFHSN 2002, Eurecom Institut. [Osafune] Performance Comparison of Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocol, IEICE 2002, Hitachi Co. [Rastogi] LQoS support for reactive ad hoc routing protocol, Tech. Report, Indian institute of Technology.

47. Packet Delivery Fraction • The effect of mobility rate and traffic load on PDF • Fluctuation • Congestion Fluctuation Fluctuation Congestion 10 sources 20 sources 30 sources

48. Routing Overhead (pkt) • Reaction to mobility (main cause of link failure) • Caching (DSR), route request (AODV), periodical link state (OLSR), and • beaconing and PREQ (HARP+TM) 20 sources 30 sources 10 sources

49. Routing Overhead (bytes) • Reaction to mobility (main cause of link failure) • Caching (DSR), route request (AODV), beaconing and PREQ (HARP+TM) 10 sources 20 sources 30 sources

50. Forest Construction • A forest is constructed by connecting each node to its preferred neighbor and vice versa. c d g Periodical Beacon b k x c • Node k: • PN = f then B = (ZID, k, 4, 1, f) a f y s t • Node f: • PN = y then B = (ZID, f, 5, 1, y) INTRA-ZONE TABLE OF NODES k AND f NIDLearned_PN f NIDLearned_PN y k