1 / 39

Robust Wireless Multicast using Network Coding

Robust Wireless Multicast using Network Coding. Dawn Project Review, UCSC Sept 12, 06 Mario Gerla Computer Science Dept, UCLA gerla@cs.ucla.edu ; www.cs.ucla.edu/NRL. Background – Network Coding. Traditional multicast: store and forward. Background – Network Coding.

jason
Download Presentation

Robust Wireless Multicast using Network Coding

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. Robust Wireless Multicast using Network Coding Dawn Project Review, UCSC Sept 12, 06 Mario Gerla Computer Science Dept, UCLA gerla@cs.ucla.edu; www.cs.ucla.edu/NRL

  2. Background – Network Coding Traditional multicast: store and forward

  3. Background – Network Coding Network Coding:store-mix-forward

  4. a+b a+b b a a a a a a b a a b a b a Network Coding : wireless net • Wu et al. (2003); Wu, Chou, Kung (2004) • Lun, Médard, Ho, Koetter (2004) Store-mix-forward a a,b a a a a,b b,a b optimal routingenergy per bit = 5 network codingenergy per bit = 4.5

  5. Random Network Coding Sender Every packet p carries e = [e1e2e3] encoding vector prefix indicating how it is constructed (e.g., coded packet p = ∑eixiwhere xiis original packet) x y z A αx + βy + γz buffer Random combination Intermediate nodes randomly mix incoming packets to generate outgoing packets Destination

  6. Robust NC Multicast • Most studies have evaluated NC M-cast in static networks; no errors • In tactical nets one must consider: • Random errors; External interference/jamming • Motion; path breakage • Target application: • Multicast (buffered) streaming • Some loss tolerance • Some delay tolerance (store & playback at destination) - non interactive

  7. Network Coding in static wireless nets • For costefficiency • Médard et al. “Min-cost operation over coded Networks.” IEEE T-IT • Fragouli et al. “A network coding approach to energy efficient broadcasting…”, INFOCOM ’06 • Wu et al. “Minimum-energy multicast in mobile ad hoc networks using network coding.”IEEE TComm. • For reliability • Médard et al. “On coding for reliable communication over packet networks.” • Others… • Ephremides et al. “Joint scheduling and wireless network coding.” In Proc. NETCOD 2005.

  8. NC vs Conventional M-cast comparison • Conventional Multicast: ODMRP • Mesh “fabric”; Redundant paths • Robust to motion and to errors

  9. NC-Multicast evaluation • Simulation study • Scenarios with errors and motion • Reported in IEEE Wireless Communication Magazine Oct. 2006 issue • Performance bounds • Static grid - “corridor” model • Uniform, random errors • Idealized MAC protocol (time slotting; non interfering sets of hyperarcs) • Linear programming optimal solutions • Manually computed optimal solutions • Reported in MILCOM 2006

  10. Simulation experiments • Settings • QualNet • 100 nodes on 1500 x 1500 m2 • 5 Kbytes/sec traffic (512B packet) - light load • Single source; multiple destinations • Random Waypoint Mobility • 20 receivers • Metrics • Good packet ratios: num. of data packets received within deadline (1sec) vs. total num. of data packets generated • Normalized packet O/H: total no. of packets generated vs no. of data packet received • Delay: packet delivery time

  11. ODMRP vs NC: Reliability Good Packet Ratio

  12. ODMRP vs NC: Efficiency

  13. ODMRP vs NC: Delay

  14. ODMRP vs. NC: Highway scenario Randomly moving 200 nodes on 10kmx50m field. All nodes are receivers.

  15. Robustness of NC approach Robust to mobility Robust to random errors

  16. Throughput Bounds • Max NC-MCAST throughput in wireless networks? • Previous simulation results based on light load. As load is increased, congestion leads to performance collapse • Our approach: evaluate max throughput analytically for a simple grid structure, the “corridor”:

  17. Linear Programming approach • To calculate and compare maximum throughputs with and without NC, we use LP formulation • Maximum multicast throughput LP models exist for wired networks • We developed LP models for maximum throughput in unreliable wireless networks based on: • LP model developed for min-cost problems in unreliable wired network by Muriel et al. • wireless medium contention constraints • Also, we solve with LP for max throughput of conventional multicast (single tree and tree packing) • LP solutions matched with “manual” solutions

  18. Related Work – Throughput Bound • Previous works show the gap between NC and S/F for wired networks with no loss (e.g. log(n)) • For wireless networks • Ephremides et al. “Joint scheduling and wireless network coding.” In Proc. NETCOD 2005. • Wu et al. “Network planning in wireless ad hoc networks: a cross-layer.”IEEE JSAC 2005. => Both show throughput gain of NC calculated using link scheduling heuristics

  19. Linear Programming Formulation maximize f Wireless medium contention constraints Wireless flow conservation constraints

  20. Maximum Multicast Throughput Comparison: NC vs Conventional CORRIDOR MODEL Sender Receivers

  21. Network Coding: Link schedule achieving throughput of 2/3 A B C D C B D A B A (3) (1) (2) (4) (5) (6) E F G H G H E F F E D C A B C D A+B C+D (9) (7) (8) (10) (11) (12)

  22. Multicast with multiple embedded trees (no NC): Link schedule achieves 2/5 throughput B A A B A B A (3) (1) (2) (4) (5) D C C D C D C B (9) (7) (8) (10) (6)

  23. An “optimal” Single Tree multicast schedule that achieves 1/3 A B A B A B (3) (1) (2) (4) (5) (6)

  24. Future Work in Network Coding • Implement NC - Mcast congestion control and ETE recovery above UDP • If loss used as feedback, key problem is discrimination between random error and congestion • TCP over Network Coded unicast • Network Coding solutions for intermittent connectivity • Models that include mobility

  25. Car-Car or Car-Infostation communications using DSRC DSRC: Dedicated Short Range Communication 802.11p IEEE Task group and derived from 802.11a Vehicular Sensor Networks - Epidemic Dissemination Models

  26. Vehicular Sensor Applications • Environment • Traffic congestion monitoring • Urban pollution monitoring • Civic and Homeland security • Forensic accident or crime site investigations • Terrorist tracking

  27. Accident Scenario: storage & retrieval • Private Cars: • Periodically collect images on the street (store data locally) • Process the data and classify the event • Create Meta-Data for event -- Summary(Type, Option, Location, Vehicle ID, …) • Post it on a “distributed index” • The police access data from distributed storage

  28. Epidemic Posting & Harvesting • Exploit “mobility” to create index and disseminate summaries • Vehicles periodically broadcast summary of sensed data to their neighbors • Data “owner” advertises only “his” own summaries to his neighbors • Neighbors listen to advertisements and store them into their local storage • A mobile agent (the police) harvests summaries from mobile nodes by actively querying mobile nodes • Vehicles return all “summaries” collected so far

  29. Epidemic Diffusion - Idea: Mobility-Assist Summary Diffusion

  30. Keep “relaying” its summary to its neighbors Epidemic Diffusion- Idea: Mobility-Assist Summary Diffusion 1) “Periodically” Relay (Broadcast) its summary to Neighbors 2) Listen and store other’s relayed summaries into one’s storage

  31. Sum. Rep Sum. Req Epidemic Diffusion - Idea: Mobility-Assist Summary Harvesting • Agent (Police) harvestssummaries from its neighbors • Nodes return all the summariesthey have collected so far

  32. Harvesting Analysis • Metrics • Fraction of harvested summaries F(t) • Analysis assumption • Discrete time analysis (time step Δt) • N disseminating nodes • Each node ni advertises a single summary si

  33. s=vΔt 2R Harvesting Analysis-Regular Nodes • Expected number (α) of contacts in ∆t: • ρ : density of disseminating nodes • v : average speed • R: communication range • Incremental number of summaries harvested by a regular node ∆Et = Et - Et-1: • Prob. of meeting a not yet infected node is 1-Et-1/N

  34. Harvesting Analysis- Agent Node • Agent harvesting summaries from its neighbors (total α nodes) • A regular node has “passively” collected so far Et summaries • Probability that agent can collect a specific summary=Et/N • Specific summary collected from α neighbors with probability 1-(1-Et/N) • Let E*t = Expected number of summaries harvested by the agent

  35. Harvesting Analysis - Harvesting Fraction • Numerical analysis Area: 2400x2400m2Radio range: 250m # nodes: 200Speed: 10m/sk=1 (one hop relaying)k=2 (two hop relaying)

  36. Simulation • Simulation Setup • Implemented using NS-2 • 802.11a: 11Mbps, 250m transmission range • Network: 2400m*2400m • Mobility Models • Random waypoint (RWP) • Urban map model: • Group mobility model • Random Merge and split at intersections • Westwood map Westwood Area

  37. Summary harvesting results with random waypoint mobility Simulation

  38. Summary harvesting results with urban map mobility Simulation

  39. Future Work • Further investigate dependence of dissemination/harvesting from motion • Enhance track models to reflect realistic (urban, open) scenarios • Motion pattern characterization • NCR (Neighborhood Change Rate) • Fraction of “traveling buddies”, etc • Data mining in large spatial-temporal databases on mobile platforms

More Related