1 / 59

Paradigm Shift in Protocol Design

Paradigm Shift in Protocol Design. Used to:. May end up with suboptimal performance or failures due to lack of context in the design. Propose to:. Problem Statement. How to gain insight into deployment context? How to utilize insight to design future services? Approach

kujawski
Download Presentation

Paradigm Shift in Protocol Design

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. Paradigm Shift in Protocol Design Used to: • May end up with suboptimal performance or failures due to lack of context in the design Propose to:

  2. Problem Statement • How to gain insight into deployment context? • How to utilize insight to design future services? Approach • Extensive trace-based analysis to identify dominant trends & characteristics • Analyze user behavioral patterns • Individual user behavior and mobility • Collective user behavior: grouping, encounters • Integrate findings in modeling and protocol design • I. User mobility modeling – II. Behavioral grouping • III. Information dissemination in mobile societies, profile-cast

  3. Analyze Represent Trace Characterize (Cluster) The TRACE framework MobiLib Employ (Modeling & Protocol Design)

  4. Trace Vision:Community-wide Wireless/Mobility Library • Library of • Measurements from Universities, vehicular networks • Realistic models of behavior (mobility, traffic, friendship, encounters) • Benchmarks for simulation and evaluation • Tools for trace data mining • Use insights to design future context-aware protocols? • http://nile.cise.ufl.edu/MobiLib

  5. Trace Libraries of Wireless Traces • Multi-campus (community-wide) traces: • MobiLib (USC (04-06), now @ UFL) • nile.cise.ufl.edu/MobiLib • 15+ Traces from: USC, Dartmouth, MIT, UCSD, UCSB, UNC, UMass, GATech, Cambridge, UFL, … • Tools for mobility modeling (IMPORTANT, TVC), data mining • CRAWDAD (Dartmouth) • Types of traces: • University Campus (mainly WLANs) • Conference AP and encounter traces • Municipal (off-campus) wireless • Bus & vehicular wireless networks • Others … (on going)

  6. Trace Wireless Networks and Mobility Measurements • In our case studies we use WLAN traces • From University campuses & corporate networks (4 universities, 1 corporate network) • The largest data sets about wireless network users available to date (# users / lengths) • No bias: not “special-purpose”, data from all users in the network • We also analyze • Vehicular movement trace (Cab-spotting) • Human encounter trace (at Infocom Conf)

  7. Case study I – Individual mobility

  8. Case Study I: Goal • To understand the mobility/usage pattern of individual wireless network users • To observe how environments/user type/trace-collection techniques impact the observations • To propose a realistic mobility model based on empirical observations • That is mathematically tractable • That is capable of characterizing multiple classes of mobility scenarios

  9. IMPACT: Investigation of Mobile-user Patterns Across University Campuses using WLAN Trace Analysis* - 4 major campuses – 30 day traces studied from 2+ years of traces - Total users > 12,000 users - Total Access Points > 1,300 • Understand changes of user association behavior w.r.t. • Time - Environment - Device type - Trace collection method * W. Hsu, A. Helmy, “IMPACT: Investigation of Mobile-user Patterns Across University Campuses using WLAN Trace Analysis”, two papers at IEEE Wireless Networks Measurements (WiNMee), April 2006

  10. Represent Metrics for Individual Mobility Analysis • What kind of spatial preference do users exhibit? • The percentile of time spent at the most frequently visited locations • What kind of temporal repetition do users exhibit? • The probability of re-appearance • How often are the nodes present? • Percentage of “online” time

  11. Observations: Visited Access Points (APs) Fraction of online time associated with the AP Prob.(coverage > x) CCDF of coverage of users [percentage of visited APs] Average fraction of time a MN associates with APs • Individual users access only a very small portion of APs in the network. • On average a user spends more than 95% of time at its top 5 most visited APs. • Long-term mobility is highly skewed in terms of time associated with each AP. • Users exhibit “on”/”off” behavior that needs to be modeled.

  12. Repetitive Behavior • Clear repetitive patterns of association in wireless network users. • Typically, user association patterns show the strongest repetitive pattern at time gap of one day/one week.

  13. Skewed location preference Characterize On/off activity pattern Periodic re-appearance Prob.(online time fraction > x) Mobility Characteristics from WLANs • Simple existing modelsare very differentfrom the characteristicsin WLAN

  14. Mobility Models • Mobility models are of crucial importance for the evaluation of wireless mobile networks [IMP03] • Requirements for mobility models • Realism (detailed behavior from traces) • Parameterized, tunable behavior • Mathematical tractability • Related work on mobility modeling • Random models (Random walk/waypoint): inadequate for human mobility • Improved synthetic models (pathway model, RPGM, WWP, FWY, MH) – more realistic, difficult to analyze • Trace-based model (T/T++): trace-specific, not general

  15. 75% 25% Employ Time-variant Community (TVC) Model(W. Hsu, Thyro, K. Psounis, A. Helmy, “Modeling Time-variant User Mobility in Wireless Mobile Networks”, IEEE INFOCOM, 2007, Trans. on Networking 2009) • Skewed location visiting preference • Create “communities” to be the preferred area of movement • Each node can have its own community • Node moves with two different epoch types – Local or roaming • Each epoch is a random-direction,straight-line movement • Local epochs in the community • Roaming epochs around the whole simulation area

  16. Employ Tiered Time-variant Community (TVC) Model • Periodical re-appearance • Create structure in time – Periods • Node moves with different parameters in periods to capture time-dependent mobility • Repetitive structure • Finer granularity in space & time • Multi-tier communities • Multiple time periods

  17. Using the TVC Model – Reproducing Mobility Characteristics • (STEP1) Identify the popular locations; assign communities • (STEP2) Assignparameters to the communities according to stats • (STEP3) Add user on-off patterns (e.g., in WLAN, users are usually off when moving)

  18. Using the TVC Model – Reproducing Mobility Characteristics • WLAN trace (example: MIT trace) Skewed location visiting preference Periodic re-appearance * Model-simplified: single community per node. Model-complex: multiple communities ** Similar matches achieved for USC and Dartmouth traces

  19. Using the TVC Model – Reproducing Mobility Characteristics • Vehicular trace (Cab-spotting)

  20. Using the TVC Model – Reproducing Mobility Characteristics • Human encounter trace at a conference Inter-meeting time A encounters B Encounter duration time Encounter duration Inter-meeting time

  21. Case study II – Groups in WLAN

  22. Case Study II: Goal • Identify similar users (in terms of long run mobility preferences) from the diverse WLAN user population • Understand the constituents of the population • Identify potential groups for group-aware service • In this case study we classify users based on their mobility trends (or location-visiting preferences) • We consider semester-long USC trace (spring 2006, 94days) and quarter-long Dartmouth trace (spring 2004, 61 days)

  23. Association vector: (library, office, class) =(0.2, 0.4, 0.4) Represent Representation of User Association Patterns • We choose to represent summary of user association in each day by a single vector • a = {aj : fraction of online time user i spends at APj on day d} • Summarize the long-run mobility in an “association matrix” • Office, 10AM -12PM • Library, 3PM – 4PM-Class, 6PM – 8PM

  24. Eigen-behavior • Eigen-behaviors: The vectors that describe the maximum remaining power in the association matrix (obtained through Singular Value Decompostion)with quantifiable importance • Eigen-behavior Distance calculates similarity of users by weighted inner products of eigen-behaviors. • Assoc. patterns can be re-constructed with low rank & error • Benefits: Reduced computation and noise

  25. Similarity-based User Classification • With the distance between users U and V defined as 1-Sim(U,V), we use hierarchical clustering to find similar user groups. USC Dartmouth *AMVD = Average Minimum Vector Distance

  26. Validation of User Groups • Significance of the groups – users in the same group are indeed much more similar to each other than randomly formed groups (0.93 v.s. 0.46 for USC, 0.91 v.s. 0.42 for Dartmouth) • Uniqueness of the groups – the most important group eigen-behavior is important for its own group but not other groups

  27. User Groups in WLAN - Observations • Identified hundreds of distinct groups of similar users • Skewed group size distribution – the largest 10 groups account for more than 30% of population on campus. Power-law distributed group sizes. • Most groups can be described by a list of locations with a clear ordering of importance • We also observe groups visiting multiple locations with similar importance – taking the most important location for each user is not sufficient

  28. Case study III – Encounter Patterns

  29. Case Study III: Goal • Understand inter-node encounter patterns from a global perspective • How do we represent encounter patterns? • How do the encounter patterns influence network connectivity and communication protocols? • Encounter definition: • In WLAN: When two mobile nodes access the same AP at the same timethey have an‘encounter’ • In DTN: When two mobile nodes move within communication range they have an‘encounter’

  30. Observations: Encounters Prob. (unique encounter fraction > x) Prob. (total encounter events > x) CCDF of unique encounter count CCDF of total encounter count • In all the traces, the MNs encounter a small fraction of the user population. • A user encounters 1.8%-6% on averageof the user population (except UCSD) • The number of total encounters for the users follows a BiPareto distribution.

  31. Group of good friends… Cliques with random links to join them Represent Encounter-Relationship (ER) graph • Draw a link to connect a pair of nodes if they ever encounter with each other … Analyze the graph properties?

  32. Small World Small Worlds of Encounters • Encounter graph: nodes as vertices and edges link all vertices that encounter Regular graph Clustering Coefficient (CC) Normalized CC and PL Av. Path Length Random graph • The encounter graph is a Small World graph (high CC, low PL) • Even for short time period (1 day) its metrics (CC, PL) almost saturate

  33. B A C Background: Delay Tolerant Networks (DTN) • DTNs are mobile networks with sparse, intermittent nodal connectivity • Encounter events provide the communication opportunities among nodes • Messages are stored and moved across the network with nodal mobility

  34. Trace duration = 15 days (Fig: USC) Unreachable ratio Information Diffusion in DTNs via Encounters • Epidemic routing (spatio-temporal broadcast) achieves almost complete delivery Robust to the removal of short encounters Robust to selfish nodes (up to ~40%)

  35. Encounter-graphs using Friends • Distribution for friendship index FI is exponential for all the traces • Friendship between MNs is highly asymmetric • Among all node pairs: < 5% with FI > 0.01, and <1% with FI > 0.4 • Top-ranked friends form cliques and low-ranked friends are key to provide random links (short cuts) to reduce the degree of separation in encounter graph.

  36. Is B similar to V? Is E similar to V? ? Is C/D similar to V? Profile-castW. Hsu, D. Dutta, A. Helmy, ACM Mobicom 2007 • Sending messages to others with similar behavior, without knowing their identity • Announcements to users with specific behavior V • Interest-based ads, similarity resource discovery • Assuming DTN-like environment C B E D A

  37. Profile-cast Use Cases • Mobility-based profile-cast • Targeting group of users who move in a particular pattern (lost-and-found, context-aware messages, moviegoers) • Approach: use “similarity metric” between users • Mobility-independent profile-cast • Targeting people with a certain characteristics independent of mobility (classic music lovers) • Approach: use “Small World” encounter patterns

  38. Mobility space S N D N N N S D D Forward?? Mobility-based Profile-cast Scoped message spread in the mobility space

  39. 1. profiling S N N N N Each row represents an association vector for a time slot An entry represents the percentage of online time during time slot i at location j Sum. vectors Profile-cast Operation • Profiling user mobility • The mobility of a node is represented by an association matrix • Singular value decomposition provides a summary of the matrix (A few eigen-behavior vectors are sufficient, e.g. for 99% of users at most 7 vectors describe 90% of power in the association matrix)

  40. 1. profiling S N N N N 2. Forwarding decision Profile-cast Operation • Determining user similarity • S sends Eigen behaviors for the virtual profile to N • N evaluated the similarity by weighted inner products of Eigen-behaviors • Message forwarded if Sim(U,V) is high (the goal is to deliver messages to nodes with similar profile) • Privacy conserving: N and S do not send information about their own behavior

  41. * Results presented as the ratio to epidemic routing Profile-cast Evaluation • Epidemic: Near perfect delivery ratio, low delay, high overhead • Centralized: Near perfect delivery ratio, low overhead, a bit extra delay • Decentral: provides tradeoff between delivery & overhead • Random: poor delivery ratio Epidemic Decentral Decentral Decentral Random Random Random Random - Decentralized I-cast achieves: > 50% reduction in overhead of Epidemic >30% increase in delivery of Random

  42. Success Rate Delay Overhead 92% 45% more overhead Evaluation - Result • Centralized: Excellent successrate with only 3% overhead. • Similarity-based: • (1) 61% success rate at low overhead, 92% success rate at 45% overhead • (2) A flexible success rate – overhead tradeoff • RTx with infinite TTL: Much more overhead undersimilar success rate • Short RTx with many copies: Good success rate/overhead, but delay is still long

  43. Flooding Flood-sim S S S S S Single long random walk Multiple short random walks Mobility Profile-cast (intra-group) Goal

  44. S S S S S S T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. T.P. Gradient-ascend Single long random walk Multiple short random walks Mobility Profile-cast (inter-group) Goal Flooding Flooding_sim

  45. Performance Comparison Gradient ascend helpsto overcome the difficult case – when the source is far from T.P. Few long RW is better when S is far from T.P. but many short RW is betterwhen S is close to T.P.

  46. Performance Comparison Few long RW is better when S is close toT.P. but many short RW is betterwhen S is close to T.P. Gradient ascend helpsto overcome the difficult case – when the source is far from T.P. Gradient ascend has some extra delay compared with flooding

  47. Profile-cast Initial Results • Adjustable overhead/delivery rate tradeoff • 61% delivery rate of flooding with 3% overhead • 92% delivery rate with 45% overhead • Better than single random walk in terms of delay, delivery rate • Multiple short random walks also work well in this case

  48. S S S S S Mobility Independent Profile-cast Goal Flooding SmallWorld-based Single long random walk Multiple short random walks

  49. Future Work • Sending to a mobility profile specified by the sender • Gradient ascend followed by similarity comparison (in the mobility space) • Mobility independent profile-cast • The encounter pattern provides a network in which most nodes are reachable • We don’t want to flood – How to leverage the Small World encounter pattern to reach the “neighborhood” of most nodes efficiently?

  50. Future Work • One-copy-per-clique in the “mobility space” • We expect this to work because similarity in mobility leads to frequent encounters

More Related