1 / 43

Exploiting Diversity in Wireless Networks

Exploiting Diversity in Wireless Networks. Nitin H. Vaidya University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign www.crhc.uiuc.edu/wireless Presentation at Mesh Networking Summit Snoqualmie, WA, June 23-24, 2004. Capacity of Wireless Networks. Limited by Interference Available spectrum

ksena
Download Presentation

Exploiting Diversity in Wireless 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. Exploiting Diversity in Wireless Networks Nitin H. Vaidya University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign www.crhc.uiuc.edu/wireless Presentation at Mesh Networking Summit Snoqualmie, WA, June 23-24, 2004

  2. Capacity of Wireless Networks Limited by • Interference • Available spectrum Need to find ways to get most out of available spectrum

  3. Diversity / Multiplicity / Heterogeneity • Diversity provides flexibility in using available resources • Can help improve performance

  4. Diversity / Multiplicity / Heterogeneity Research Agenda • Abstractions that capture diversity • Protocols that exploit diversity

  5. Diversity / Heterogeneity • Many dimensions: • Physical layer • Architecture • Upper layer

  6. Channel Diversity

  7. Channel Diversity • Multiple channels can help improve performance • Obvious approaches: • Exploit diversity to choose channel with best gain • Use multiple channels simultaneously to improve capacity • Developing practical protocols for the “obvious” approaches is still a challenge

  8. Alternative Approach • Exploit protocol characteristics to benefit from the diversity • Examples: • Pipelining • Backup routes

  9. IEEE 802.11 • Channel contention resolved using backoff(and optional RTS/CTS) Backoff RTS/CTS Data / ACK

  10. Simple Observation • Backoff keeps channel idle  unproductive • Most protocols have such idle contention periods Unproductive Backoff RTS/CTS Data / ACK

  11. Pipelining Using Multiple Channels • Control Channel: Backoff and RTS/CTS • Data Channel: Data and ACK Backoff RTS/CTS Backoff RTS/CTS Backoff RTS/CTS Stage 1 Data / ACK Data / ACK Stage 2

  12. Backoff RTS/CTS Backoff RTS/CTS Backoff RTS/CTS Pipelining works well only if pipeline stages are balanced ! Control Channel Data / ACK Data / ACK Data Channel

  13. Solution: Partial Pipelining • Only partially resolve channel contention in the pipelined stage

  14. Backoff RTS/CTS Backoff RTS/CTS Backoff RTS/CTS Partial Pipelining • Stage 1: Narrow-Band Busy Tone Channel • Stage 2: Data channel Control Channel Data / ACK Data / ACK Data Channel

  15. Partial Pipelining • No packets transmitted on busy tone channel • Bandwidth can be small

  16. Partial Pipelining • By migrating backoff to a narrow-band channel, cost of backoff is reduced Data Channel Bandwidth Area = cost of backoff Busy Tone Channel Bandwidth Backoff Duration

  17. Moral of the Story • Looking beyond physical layerdiversity exploitation schemes helps • Protocol characteristics can be exploited

  18. Another Example

  19. Multiple Interfaces • Consider devices equipped with both 802.11a and b

  20. Channel Diversity • 802.11b “network” • denser than the 802.11a network • but provides lower rate Example approach: • Use 802.11a as primary network • Use 802.11b network to provide backup routes when 802.11a routes fail • The 802.11b network could be used for other things too

  21. Protocol Interactions • For TCP, route failure more painful than a degradation in available capacity • The backup routes can avoid a route failure • Benefits of added capacity can be magnified by exploiting protocol behavior

  22. Research Agenda • Develop practical protocols that can exploit diversity • Pay attention to protocol characteristics

  23. Antenna Heterogeneity

  24. Antenna Heterogeneity • “Fixed beam” antennas prevalent on mobile devices • Omnidirectional antennas (often with diversity) • Other antennas likely to become more prevalent • Switched, steered, adaptive, smart … • Can form narrow beamforms, which may be changed over time • Re-configurable antennas • Beamforms can be changed over time by reconfiguring the antenna, but not necessarily narrow beams

  25. Antenna Heterogeneity • Beamforms: All antennas are not made equal • Timescale: Can beamforms be changed at packet timescales?

  26. Protocol Design • Protocols designed for “fixed” beam antennas inadequate with “movable” beam antennas • State of the art MAC Protocols for specific antenna capabilities

  27. Research Challenge How to design “antenna-adaptive” protocols ? • Need to develop suitable antenna abstractions that span a range of antenna designs • Forces us to think about essential characteristics of antennas • Example: Variability of beamforms a more fundamental property than directionality

  28. Diversity / Heterogeneity • Many dimensions: • Physical layer • Architecture • Upper layer

  29. Pure Ad Hoc Networks • No “infrastructure” • All communication over (one or more) wireless hops B C D E A Z Ad hoc connectivity Y X

  30. Hybrid Networks • Infrastructure + Ad hoc connectivity infrastructure AP1 AP2 B C D E A Z Ad hoc connectivity Y X

  31. Hybrid Networks R • Infrastructure may include wireless relays infrastructure AP1 AP2 R P C B R D A Z Ad hoc connectivity Y X

  32. infrastructure AP1 AP2 R P C B R D A Z Ad hoc connectivity Y X Hybrid Networks • Heterogeneity • Some hosts connected to a backbone, most are not • Access points/relays may have more processing capacity, energy

  33. A Heterogeneity Beneficial • Infrastructure provides a frame of reference • Provide location-aware services • Reduce route discovery overhead AP0 AP1 AP2 AP3 R3 R2 R1 D B A

  34. infrastructure AP1 AP2 R P C B R D A Z Ad hoc connectivity Y X Heterogeneity Beneficial • Reduce diameter of the network • Lower delay • Potentially greater per-flow throughput

  35. Poor Man’s Ad Hoc Network Infrastructure Facilitates New Trade-Offs (hypothetical curves) overhead connectivity User density distribution affects the trade-off Ad hoc-ness

  36. Research Issues • How to trade “complexity” with “performance” ? • Parameterize ad hoc-ness ? • Should the spectrum be divided between infrastructure and ad hoc components? • What functionality for relays / access points?

  37. Misbehavior

  38. Misbehavior • Misbehavior occurs with limited resources • Violating protocol specifications benefits misbehaving hosts • Example: Small backoffs in 802.11  higher throughput

  39. Research Agenda • Protocols that maximize performance while discouraging/penalizing misbehavior • Challenge: • Wireless channel prone to temporal and spatial variations • Different players see different channel state • Impossible to detect misbehavior 100% reliably

  40. Conclusions

  41. Conclusions • Diversity/Heterogeneity natural to wireless networks • Need better abstractions to capture the diversity • Need protocols that can exploit available diversity • Need to be able to survive misbehavior

  42. Other Research • Distributed algorithms for multi-hop wireless networks • Clock synchronization • Message ordering • Leader election • Mutual exclusion

  43. Thanks!www.crhc.uiuc.edu/wireless Advertisement: National Summit for Community Wireless Networks Urbana-Champaign, Illinois August 20-22, 2004 http://www.cuwireless.net

More Related