Mac Protocols in Manets: Modeling and Simulation: Presented at Mobihoc 2002 Rajive Bagrodia Mineo Takai

Copyright 2002, SNT, Inc.
All Rights Reserved

MAC Protocols in MANETs:
Modeling and Simulation
Presented at Mobihoc 2002
Rajive Bagrodia
Mineo Takai
UCLA Computer Science Department
Scalable Network Technologies
Copyright 2002, SNT, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Simulation Life Cycle (for Network Models)
(Re)define
Experiment(s)
Device
Model(s)
Application
(Traffic
Generation)
Mobility
Specification
Execute
Model
Collect
statistics
Analyze
Results
MANET Simulation: Level of Details
g MANET simulation in protocol design and development
ieasy prototyping, good repeatability...
g Protocol verification
iWrite detailed protocol models
iSufficient to use abstract models at other layers
Abstract (probabilistic) models can create sequences of events
that can possibly but rarely happen in real networks
g Protocol performance evaluation
iWrite detailed protocol models
iImportant to use detailed models at other layers
Effects of multiple layer interactions cannot be ignored for the
performance evaluation
MANET Simulation: Protocol Performance
Evaluation
g Validity of simulation results depends on how
properly the system is modeled
iWhen an important aspect is missing, performance results
could be misleading
g Physical layer modeling in wireless network
simulation
iFrom bits to waves: very different from protocol modeling
iNot carefully verified even in commonly used network
simulators
iEffects of physical layer modeling are often underestimated
in higher layer protocol studies
g Impact of physical layer modeling in two commonly
used simulators: ns-2 (2.1b8) and GloMoSim (2.02)
Comparisons of Physical Layer Models in
Different Simulation Tools (1)
g ns-2 (2.1b8) and GloMoSim (2.02)
iShare a common set of models, but they are developed
independently by different groups of people
iPath loss: two-ray
iPhysical layer: IEEE 802.11 DSSS PHY
iMAC sub-layer: IEEE 802.11 DCF MAC
iNetwork layer: static routing
iApplication layer: CBR
g Parameter adjustment (GloMoSim set to ns-2)
iRadio frequency: 914 MHz in ns-2, 2.4 GHz in GloMoSim
iTransmit power: 24.5 dBm in ns-2, 15 dBm in GloMoSim
iNetwork and transport header sizes:
none in ns-2, IP+UDP in GloMoSim
g Running the simplest wireless scenario
iN (= 50, 100, 200) nodes randomly placed in 10 x N / 10
cells
iN CBR sessions at P (= 1, 2, 5, 10) 512 byte packets per
second
iStatic routes generated by DSDV prior to the comparison
iNo mobility
iThree cases for each pair
of N and P (36 cases total)
iMinimal use of random
number generation
(MAC DCF)
g PDRs (Packet Delivery Ratio) from ns-2 and GloMoSim
g The differences are significant under non-extreme network conditions
g Two major causes of PDR differences:
iPhysical layer preamble and header lengths
iNoise and interference computation
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
PDR in ns-2
P
D
R

i
n

G
l
o
M
o
S
i
m
N = 50
N = 100
N = 200
Equal PDR
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
PDR in ns-2
P
D
R

i
n

G
l
o
M
o
S
i
m
N = 50
N = 100
N = 200
Equal PDR
Physical Layer Preamble Lengths
g IEEE 802.11 physical layer preamble and header
iSIGNAL indicates the type of modulation to be used for MPDU
iDBPSK (1 Mbps) is used for modulating PLCP regardless of the data rate
i144 + 48 = 192 bits = 192 us (at 1 Mbps) in GloMoSim
i144 + 48 = 192 bits = 96 us (at 2 Mbps) in ns-2 (fixed in 2.1b9)
Noise and Interference Computation
g Power of interfering signals is cumulative
g Example: SINR at T
3
iP
S
/ (P
I1
+ P
I2
+ P
I3
+ P
N
) in GloMoSim
iP
S
/ P
I3
in ns-2
Noise(P
N
)
I
n
t
e
r
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

P
o
w
e
r
P
I3
P
I2
T
1
T
2
T
3
T
4
T
5
T
6
Signal of Interest(P
S
)
P
I1
g Further adjustments made to
GloMoSim models:
i96 us preamble
iNo interference power
accumulation
g Interference modeling made
larger difference
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
(
5
0
,

1
)
(
5
0
,

2
)
(
5
0
,

5
)
(
5
0
,

1
0
)
(
1
0
0
,

1
)
(
1
0
0
,

2
)
(
1
0
0
,

5
)
(
1
0
0
,

1
0
)
(
2
0
0
,

1
)
(
2
0
0
,

2
)
(
2
0
0
,

5
)
(
2
0
0
,

1
0
)
Network size and traffic load (N, P)
P
D
R

c
h
a
n
g
e
Preamble length
Noise calculation
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
PDR in ns-2
P
D
R

i
n

G
l
o
M
o
S
i
m
N = 50
N = 100
N = 200
Equal PDR
Before
Adjustment
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
PDR in ns-2
P
D
R

i
n

G
l
o
M
o
S
i
m
N = 50
N = 100
N = 200
Equal PDR
After
Adjustment
Effects of Physical Layer Modeling
in Multiple Layer Interactions
g Both differences make PDR predicted by ns-2 higher
g Their contributions are quite different:
iLonger preamble length reduces the effective link capacity: more
queue overflow, less MAC drops
iMore realistic interference computation causes many collisions:
more MAC drops, less queue overflow
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
(
5
0
,

1
)
(
5
0
,

2
)
(
5
0
,

5
)
(
5
0
,

1
0
)
(
1
0
0
,

1
)
(
1
0
0
,

2
)
(
1
0
0
,

5
)
(
1
0
0
,

1
0
)
(
2
0
0
,

1
)
(
2
0
0
,

2
)
(
2
0
0
,

5
)
(
2
0
0
,

1
0
)
P
D
R

d
e
g
r
a
d
a
t
i
o
n
Queue overflow
MAC retx limit
Longer preamble length
-0.15
-0.1
-0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
(
5
0
,

1
)
(
5
0
,

2
)
(
5
0
,

5
)
(
5
0
,

1
0
)
(
1
0
0
,

1
)
(
1
0
0
,

2
)
(
1
0
0
,

5
)
(
1
0
0
,

1
0
)
(
2
0
0
,

1
)
(
2
0
0
,

2
)
(
2
0
0
,

5
)
(
2
0
0
,

1
0
)
P
D
R

d
e
g
r
a
d
a
t
i
o
n
Queue overflow
MAC retx limit
Realistic interference computation
Impact of Physical Layer Modeling on Higher
Layer Protocol Performance (1)
g 100 node scenario (Das et al INFOCOM 2000)
iMobility: Random waypoint model (0-20 m/s with 100s pause)
iPropagation: two-ray with Rayleigh, Ricean (K = 5) and no fading
iPhysical layer: IEEE 802.11 DSSS PHY with BER and SNRT
iMAC sub-layer: IEEE 802.11 DCF MAC
iNetwork layer: IP with FIFO queue (100 packets max)
iRouting: AODV and DSR
iApplication layer: CBR (40 sessions, 512 byte packets, 2.666 pps)
S
N
R
SNR Threshold
{(1 BER
1
)^N
1
} X X {(1 BER
7
)^N
7
}
Impact of Physical Layer Modeling on Higher
Layer Protocol Performance (2)
g Result for the SNRT and No fading case consistent with the
corresponding data point in the INFOCOM paper
g AODV decimates its performance as predicted channel conditions
become severe
g DSR degrades its performance, but not as dramatically as AODV
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
BER
None
SNRT
None
BER
Ricean
SNRT
Ricean
BER
Rayleigh
SNRT
Rayleigh
Signal reception and fading models
P
D
R
AODV
DSR
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
BER
None
SNRT
None
BER
Ricean
SNRT
Ricean
BER
Rayleigh
SNRT
Rayleigh
Signal reception and fading models
E
n
d
-
t
o
-
e
n
d

d
e
l
a
y

[
s
]
AODV
DSR
QualNet
g Commercial derivative of GloMoSim
iSubstantially expanded MANET models:
AODV, DSR, OLSR, TBRPF, 802.11 DCF, 802.11 PCF,
802.11a, directional antennas,
iGUI-based model design, animation, & analysis
iCommercial protocol & device models
iMilitary comm models
iTraining, support, custom services
g SNT Focus: accurate, real-time network simulation &
management
iAccuracy via high-fidelity models (incorporating production code to
model protocols) & detailed validation
iSpeed and scalability via research into efficient scheduling and
(parallel) simulation algorithms
Accuracy
CBR, ftp, telnet,
Free space, TIREM
Radio, bus, point-point...
IEEE 802.11, 802.3,
OSPF, AODV,
IP
TCP, UDP, RSVP
Packet Store/Forward
Data Plane
wired
Physical
MAC Layer
Network
IP
Transport
Application
Link Layer
g Use an architecture that is
similar to one used in physical
networks with well-defined APIs
between neighboring layers
g Provide capability for network
emulation by supporting direct
code migration between the
model and operational
networks.
Accuracy & Scalability
g Evaluate scalability of ad hoc networks
iConstant Bit Rate (CBR) application traffic using UDP
iEach flow generates 1460 B(ytes)ps
iWireless ad hoc routing protocol
iMAC Layer: IEEE 802.11 DCF with a channel bandwidth of 2Mbps
iTwo-ray propagation path loss
iRadio range is approximately 375 meters
g Varied network sizes:10, 100, 1000, 2000, 5000, and 10000 nodes
g Node placement: uniform in square terrain with node density 253
meters squared per node
g Number of randomly selected CBR sources and destinations: one
third that of the total network size
g Simulated time: proportionate to number of nodes from 900 seconds
to 90000 seconds
g Stabilized network load: proportionate to the number of nodes from
4380bytes/s to 4866180 bytes/s
Accuracy & Scalability
Throughput vs. Network Size
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
Network Size (nodes)
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
p
u
t

(
b
i
t
s
/
s
)
Throughput
Latency vs. Network Size
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
10 100 1000 2000 5000 10000
L
a
t
e
n
c
y

(
s
)
Latency
Control Overhead vs. Network Size
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
C
o
n
t
r
o
l

O
v
e
r
h
e
a
d
Control Overhead
Packet Delivery Ratio vs. Network Size
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1
0
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
5
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
P
a
c
k
e
t

D
e
l
i
v
e
r
y

R
a
t
i
o
Packet Delivery
Ratio
(http://www.msiac.dmso.mil/journal/wong32.html)
Accuracy & Speed
g Successfully parallelized ITM; incorporated into QualNet
g Preliminary performance study
iNode density ~ 100 nodes / (km)
2
Neighboring nodes about 100m apart
iUniform distribution
iITM (Longley-Rice) using a terrain map ~ 50 mi. north of Santa
Barbara in DTED format
i802.11b radios; AODV routing
i8kbps voice traffic: every node has a 10% chance of transmitting
for 0-15 seconds to a random destination, per 60 second period
since the last transmission; 50B payload/pkt
g Two Experiments
iVaried signal propagation models: ITM & plane earth
ivaried number of nodes
Comparison of ITM and Two Ray results
g Mean end-to-end delay differed by 3x
iEffective transmission range much less for ITM than for 2-
ray, which requires more hops between sources and
destinations
iIP forwarding statistics seem to confirm this
Mean end-to-end delay for each CBR session
22.3
7.2
0
5
10
15
20
25
ITM 2-ray
T
i
m
e

(
m
s
)
Mean number of packets forwarded by IP for each
node
247
131
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
ITM 2-ray
#

o
f

p
a
c
k
e
t
s
Execution Time
Higher fidelity ITM model improves accuracy at the cost of
increased execution time.
Efficient, parallel model execution can produce substantial
benefits
Comparison of execution time between ITM and 2-ray
propagation models
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
ITM 2-ray
T
i
m
e

(
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
)
1 CPU
Simulator Performance with ITM
Completion Time, ITM (Longley-Rice), waypoint
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
30 nodes 60 nodes 120 nodes exercise
duration
T
i
m
e

(
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
)
1 CPU
2 CPUs
4 CPUs
Completion Time, ITM (Longley-Rice), fast waypoint
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
30 nodes 60 nodes 120 nodes exercise
duration
T
i
m
e

(
s
e
c
o
n
d
s
)
1 CPU
2 CPUs
4 CPUs
Dell PowerEdge 6400
(4) P III Xeon 700 MHz
w/1MB cache; 1 GB RAM
Linux-Mandrake 7.2 (2.2.x
kernel)
$12-15K
Random waypoint :
Fast: 0-10 m/s;
Slow: 0-3 m/s;
30s pause time
Machine Configuration:
QualNet Physical Layer Overview (1)
g PHY components (completed + in future release)
MAC sub-layer
Tx Data rate Rx SINR computation
Carrier sensing
BER (demodulation)
Power
Channel
Modulation
Spreading
Channel coding
DBPSK
BPSK/QPSK
BER (channel decoding)
DQPSK
GMSK
Turbo
Air interface (antenna)
QualNet Physical Layer Overview (2)
g Antenna models
iOmni-directional uniform gain
iSwitched beam multiple patters
(circular array with 8 patterns)
iSteerable multiple steerable patterns
(triangular array with 4 different beamwidths)
iAdaptive patterns on the fly plus nulling
g The use of directional antenna models is currently receiver side only
due to (omni-directional) MAC
QualNet Propagation Models
g Non terrain based pathloss models
Free space Two-ray (+ Log-normal shadowing)
g Terrain based pathloss models
ITM (Longley-Rice) TIREM
g Fading models
Rayleigh distribution Ricean distribution
g Results given to the physical layer
(antenna models)
Propagation delay AOA (angle of arrival)
Noise and Interference Modeling
g Parameters for noise and interference
itemperature of the radio T (290 K by default)
inoise factor of the radio F (10 by default)
g SINR (signal to interference and noise ratio) calculation
where k : Boltzmanns constant (1.379 10
-23
[W Hz
-1
K
-1
])
B : effective noise bandwidth of the system (data rate) [Hz]
iAll the interfering signals are assumed to conform Gaussian noise
FkTB P
P
SINR
Ii
s
+
=
others all
BER / PER Computation (1)
g BER (bit error rate) for a given SNR on Gaussian
noise (AWGN) channel is retrieved from a
precomputed look-up table
g Four BER tables are included in the QualNet release package
Net release package
nd without turbo coding
without turbo coding
ithout turbo coding
thout turbo coding
hout turbo coding
where n : number of changes in the interference power level
er level
od i
=
n
i
L
i
i
BER PER ) 1 ( 1
BER / PER Computation (2)
g BER is changed every time a signal (even if it is too small to
receive or sense) arrives at the node, thus table lookup is done
very frequently
g N signal arrivals = 2N interference power changes
g Example: 8 changes in the interference power level by 4 signals
T
I
n
t
e
r
f
e
r
e
n
c
e

p
o
w
e
r
Physical Layer Parameters
g Parameters for transmiting
itransmit power
idata rate
ichannel
imodulation
g Parameters for receiving
iBER table for demodulation and decoding
ithermal noise
ireceiver sensitivity (radio returns sensing to MAC inquiries if
it detects power above the sensitivity on the channel)
ireceive threshold (radio does not try to receive signals if
their power is below this threshold)
iantenna beam (radiation pattern)
Physical Layer Parameters
and Radio Communication Range
g Relationship of parameters to determine the radio range
(under no interference)
g Range can be determined by Rx threshold or required SNR
Tx power
Rx threshold
Rx sensitivity
Rx thermal noise
Tx
Tx power
Tx
Tx power
Rx threshold
Rx sensitivity
(Rx thermal noise)
Min SNR
S
i
g
n
a
l

p
o
w
e
r
Distance
IEEE 802.11 MAC Communication Range
g Set TX power to 80 dBm (100 kW)
iPHY RX range: 15888 m
g How long can the IEEE 802.11 MAC radio (with
DSSS PHY reference parameters) reach?
iSpeed of light: 3.0e10
8
m/s
iaAirPropagationTime (1 us): 300 m
iaSIFSTime (10 us): 3000 m
RTS/CTS Option in IEEE 802.11 (1)
g Based on the PHY parameters (two-ray):
iRX range: 376.7m
iCS range: 670.0m
g Vary the distance D in the configuration below
iD = 100 - 380
iTwo heavy CBR sessions (1 -> 2, 3 -> 2)
iWith and without RTS / CTS control frames
1 2 3
D [m]
D [m]
g Higher
throughput
w/o RTS/CTS
g No difference
in throughput
between
D = 180
and 200
(RX range/2 =
188)
g High drop in
throughput for
D = 360
and higher
g Data frame loss
w/o RTS/CTS
g RTS frame loss
otherwise
g What is the
benefits of
RTS/CTS?
g Hidden terminal
problem
g CS range / 2 =
335 (+ noise)
g Hidden terminal
problem shows
in cases with
D = 345 to 375
g What if
(RX range) <
(CS range / 2)?
Case Study: Turbo Code Model (1)
g A turbo code model has been implemented in Matlab to
generate SNR - BER lookup table
iInterleaving size: 4192 bits
iInterleaving method: Random interleaving
iDecoding algorithm: Log Maximum A Posteriori
iNumber of iterations: 5
iRate:
iRSC (Recursive Systematic Convolutional) generator:
1 1 1; 1 0 1
g Encoder
g Decoder
RSC 1
RSC 2
Interleaver
M
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
x

+

p
u
n
c
t
u
r
i
n
g
Log MAP 1
Log MAP 2
Interleaver
Interleaver
De-interleaver
D
e
m
u
l
t
i
p
l
e
x

+

d
e
-
p
u
n
c
t
u
r
i
n
g
g Encoder and decoder are modeled in Matlab
g BER performance with and without the turbo code model
g 6+ dB coding gain
with DBPSK
g 8+ dB coding gain
with BPSK
at BER = 10
-6
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
10
-7
10
-6
10
-5
10
-4
10
-3
10
-2
10
-1
10
0
SNR in dB
B
E
R
BPSK without FEC
DPSK without FEC
DPSK with FEC
BPSK with FEC
g Case study with turbo coding
i100 nodes spread over flat terrain (83,000 m
2
/node)
i100 CBR sessions (160 bytes, 50 pps)
iAODV routing protocol
i802.11 MAC DCF
i802.11 PHY DSSS
iRx threshold fixed
at 81 dBm
iVarying sensitivity
from 91 dBm to
85 dBm 0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
-91 -89 -87 -85
Radio sensitivity [dBm]
P
D
R

i
m
p
r
o
v
e
m
e
n
t
(
n
o

c
o
d
i
n
g

w
i
t
h

-
9
1

d
B
m

=
=

1
.
0
)
no channel coding
with turbo code
Common Propagation Models (1)
Simple Path Loss Models
g Free space
ireally means that its path loss exponent is 2.0
ican be combined with shadowing and fading
g Two-ray
iconsiders a ray bounced back from the ground
iuses the free space path loss model for near sights
ibecomes 4.0 exponent for far sights
iIts path loss becomes frequency independent (function of distance
and antenna heights) for far sights
d
d
h
TX
h
RX
Consideration of Terrain Effects
g ITS (Institute for Telecommunication Sciences)
ITM (Irregular Terrain Model)
ia.k.a. Longley-Rice
ihas both point-to-point mode and area mode
iPoint-to-point mode works very similarly to TIREM
iNo release restrictions unlike TIREM
g TIREM
iconsiders terrain intrusion to the Fresnel zones to determine the levels
of diffraction
Terrain Database Types
g CTDB (Compact Terrain Database)
iGridded posts or TIN (Triangulated Irregular Network) polygons for
elevation data
iTerrain features in the database
in the feature list for gridded database, or
as terrain elements for TIN only database
g USGS DEM (DTED) interface
iOnly elevation data in mesh
iGrid size: 3 arc-seconds
iTerrain data are available via USGS web site
Shadowing model
g Log-normal distribution with standard deviation [dB]
g Updates shadowing values independently from the previous
values
(Flat) Fading models
g Applies to only narrowband channels (flat fading)
iNo ISI (inter-symbol interference)
g Rayleigh distribution
(highly mobile, no line of sight signal)
g Ricean distribution with Rice factor (K)
iRayleigh case when K = 0 : no line of sight component
iNo fading case when K = : strong line of sight component
Antenna Models
g Antenna models determine antenna gains for each signal on
both transmitter and receiver ends
g The antenna gain is determined as:
G (DOA
a
, DOA
e
) [dBi], or approximately
G
a
(DOA
a
) + G
e
(DOA
e
) [dBi]
where DOA
a
and DOA
e
are direction of arrival on azimuth and
elevation planes respectively, and G
a
and G
e
are the corresponding
gains for these angles
g Antenna models return the gain for an angle closest to the given
angle
Antenna Models Provided in QualNet
g Omni-directional
always returns a fixed gain for all directions
g Switched beam
stores multiple radiation patterns and returns G
a
and G
e
for a
given direction (AOA) with a specified pattern
g Steerable beam
can store different radiation patterns and steer them to maximize
the gain for a given direction (AOA)
Switched Beam Antenna Model
g Switched beam antenna
ican have multiple radiation patterns
ican specify the pattern to use for each signal
ican scan all the patterns
and return the pattern
with the highest gain
for a given signal or
for a given direction
Pattern 0
Pattern 1
Pattern 2
Pattern 3
Steerable Beam Antenna Model
g Steerable beam antenna
ican have multiple radiation patterns with different beam widths
ican specify the pattern to use
for each signal
ican steer each pattern and
return the angle that yields
the highest gain
for a given signal
Pattern 0
Pattern 1
Pattern 2
Case Study: Electrically Steerable Beam
Antenna (1)
g Circular antenna array with 6 isotropic antenna elements
g Only phase shifting (no amplifier with each element)
g 0.4 wavelength spacing at 2.4 GHz ISM band
g Patterns created using MATLAB and fed into QualNet
Case Study: Electrically Steerable Beam
Antenna (2)
g Case study with typical MANET environment:
i100 nodes over 1500 x 1500 flat terrain
iTwo-ray path loss model (1.5m antenna height)
iIEEE 802.11 DCF MAC with RTS/CTS option
iAODV
i40 CBR sessions with 512 byte packets at 1 to 40 pps
g

Mac Protocols in Manets: Modeling and Simulation: Presented at Mobihoc 2002 Rajive Bagrodia Mineo Takai

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Mac Protocols in Manets: Modeling and Simulation: Presented at Mobihoc 2002 Rajive Bagrodia Mineo Takai

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyright 2002, SNT, Inc.

All Rights Reserved

You might also like