Reliable and Efficient Routing

Protocols for Vehicular

Communication Networks
Transfer Presentation

Katsaros Konstantinos
PhD Student
Supervisor: Dr. M. Dianati
Co-supervisor: Prof. R. Tafazolli

Outline
Introduction
Scope, Objectives, Challenges

Routing in VANETs
Taxonomy, Forwarding techniques, Recovery
strategies, Cross-layering

Achievements so far
Proposed CLWPR (System model, design
characteristics)
Performance evaluation

Future plan
Konstantinos Katsaros

Scope
Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)
Application of Information and Communication
Technologies for future transport systems
In order to:
Improve safety and traffic management
Provide infotainment services.

Vehicular Communications is an important part of

ITS.
Cellular (3G, LTE) and Dedicated Short Range
Communications (IEEE 802.11p / WAVE)
Konstantinos Katsaros

VANETs: Challenges &

Opportunities
Are a category of Mobile Ad-hoc Networks (MANETs)
with specific characteristics:
Less strict energy and computational constraints
Highly dynamic
Predictable mobility patterns
High density of nodes

Konstantinos Katsaros

Objectives of this work

To design reliable and efficient routing
protocols by exploiting:
Position and mobility information in order to
increase efficiency
PHY and MAC information in order to
increase reliability

To design a Location Service

that can provide position information for the
routing protocols
Konstantinos Katsaros

BACKGROUND
Overview of routing and forwarding
protocols for MANETs and VANETs

Konstantinos Katsaros

Routing Taxonomy
Topology
Based

Advantages

Disadvantages

Proactive

Do not flood entire network

Fast path selection

Overhead to maintain
tables

Reactive

Do not maintain routing

tables

Initial delay for route

discovery
Flood a route request

Combination of proactive and reactive in different

operation stages

Hybrid

Routing
Protocols for
VANETs

Hierarchical

Exploit clusters with similar

characteristics

Overhead to maintain
clusters

Flooding

Low complexity, high data

reception

Flood entire network

Without
Navigation

Rely on local information

only

Need a location service

(LS), more prone to local
maximum problem

With
Navigation

Exploit mobility of nodes,

less prone to local
maximum

Need a LS, increased

overhead due to
enhanced beaconing

Position
Based

Konstantinos Katsaros

Position-based Forwarding without Navigation

S
3

D
4

Konstantinos Katsaros

Random
Positive
Nearest
Most Forward
Forwarding
in
Greedy
Compass
Forwarding
Progress
Radius

Local Maximum Problem &

Recovery Techniques

Konstantinos Katsaros

Recovery strategies:
Drop packet
Enhanced Greedy
(random retransmission
once)
Carry-n-Forward
Coloring
Left hand rule
Perimeter routing

Position-based Forwarding with Navigation

1. Anchor points at junctions with

coordinator nodes
2. Enhanced beacon messages with
velocity/heading
3. Position prediction policy (dead
reckoning)
4. Estimation of link lifetime
5. Vehicle traffic information (max
velocity, traffic density)
Recovery From Local Maximum
Re-route using different anchor
points (with or without deletion)

Konstantinos Katsaros

10

Cross-Layer Optimization of
Routing Protocols
Network layer with PHY and MAC: Use
channel/link quality information for routing
decision
Network layer with Transport and
Application: Provide different levels of
priorities on packets

Konstantinos Katsaros

11

CROSS-LAYER POSITION
BASED ROUTING (CLWPR)
Proposed routing protocol: system
model and design characteristics

Konstantinos Katsaros

12

System Model
Important Assumptions:
Position and navigation information are
available (e.g., using GPS)
Nodes are equipped with the IEEE 802.11p
based communication facility

Konstantinos Katsaros

13

Main Features of CLWPR

Unicast, multi-hop, cross-layer, opportunistic routing
Neighbor discovery based on periodic 1-hop HELLO
messages
HELLO message content: position, velocity, heading, road id,
node utilization, MAC information, number of cached packets
total size 52bytes

Use of position prediction and curvemetric distance

Use of SNIR information from HELLO messages
Employ carry-n-forward strategy for local-maximum
Combine metrics in a weighting function used for
forwarding decisions

Konstantinos Katsaros

14

Weighting Function for Next

Hop Selection

The node with the least weight will be selected

Currently fi weights are fixed open issue to
optimize them or use adaptive values

Konstantinos Katsaros

15

PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION
Simulation setup, initial results,
performance analysis and comparison

Konstantinos Katsaros

16

Simulations Setup
Performance metrics
Packet Deliver Ratio (PDR),
End-to-End Delay,
network overhead.

Use ns-3 for simulations

5x5 grid network,
200 and 100 vehicles scenarios
10 concurrent vehicle-to-vehicle connections
UDP packets (512 Bytes) with 2 sec interval
IEEE 802.11p, 3Mbps, RTS/CTS enabled
Two-Ray-Ground model

Konstantinos Katsaros

17

Comparison with GPSR

Increased PDR
Reduced end-to-end delay
Increased overhead due to larger HELLO messages
Konstantinos Katsaros

18

Impact of HELLO interval and

prediction
Prediction improves PDR
More frequent HELLO
increases PDR
Network overhead could
be reduced by increasing
HELLO interval for the
same PDR threshold.

Konstantinos Katsaros

19

Influence of navigation
Navigation improves PDR
Increasing weight of
navigation information has
positive effect in higher
vehicle speeds

Konstantinos Katsaros

20

Influence of SNIR
SNIR information reduces
end-to-end delay
Due to propagation model
used, not big improvements
Expect more when
shadowing is included

Konstantinos Katsaros

21

Influence of Carry-n-Forward

Increased PDR with time of caching

Increased end-to-end delay with time of caching

Konstantinos Katsaros

22

FUTURE WORK
CWPR optimization, proposed location service,
impact assessment and security issues

Konstantinos Katsaros

23

Future Work (1)

CLWPR Optimization
Use realistic propagation model
Optimize all weighting parameters

Location Service (a)

RSUs as distributed database
Co-operation between nodes
Reduce number and latency of
queries

Konstantinos Katsaros

24

Future Work (2)

Location Service (b) heterogeneous network
Use of UMTS technologies for control and
signaling to provide location service

Impact Assessment
Asses impact of ITS applications on network
reliability

Security Issues
Analyze potential threats on reliability of vehicular
networks, specially for Location services

Konstantinos Katsaros

25

Work Plan

Konstantinos Katsaros

26

Publications
Current:
K. Katsaros, et al. CLWPR - A novel cross-layer optimized position based routing
protocol for VANETs", in IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference, pp. 200-207, 2011
K. Katsaros, et al. Application of Vehicular Communications for Improving the
Efficiency of Traffic in Urban Areas", accepted in Wireless Communications and
Mobile Computing, 2011.
K. Katsaros, et al. Performance Analysis of a Green Light Optimized Speed
Advisory (GLOSA) application using an integrated cooperative ITS simulation
platform", in Proceedings of IEEE International Wireless Communications and Mobile
Computing Conference (IWCMC), pp. 918 - 923, 2011

Planned:
Survey Paper on routing protocols for VANETs
Conf. paper @ NS-3 Workshop in SIMUTools 2012, regarding the architecture and
implementation (Nov. 11)
Journal article @ JSAC on Vehicular Communications extending CLWPR paper (Feb.
12)

Konstantinos Katsaros

27

QUESTIONS
Email: K.Katsaros@surrey.ac.uk
www: info.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/K.Katsaros/

Konstantinos Katsaros

28

Current work
Propagation Loss Model for urban
environment, initial results

Konstantinos Katsaros

29

Winner B1 model for urban V2V

Use propagation
models from [1] taking
into account buildings
and shadowing with
LOS and NLOS
components

[1] IST-WINNER D1.1.2 P. Kysti, et al., "WINNER II Channel Models", September 2007.
Available at: https://www.ist-winner.org/WINNER2-Deliverables/D1.1.2v1.1.pdf

Konstantinos Katsaros

30

TwoRayGround Vs. Winner in network graph /

connections

Konstantinos Katsaros

31

TwoRayGround Vs. Winner in PDR

PDR Vs. Velocity
TRG-BENCH

Winner-BENCH

TRG-PREDICT

Winner-PREDICT

100
90
80
70
60

Packet Delivery Ratio (5)

50
40
30
20
10
0
0

10

15

20

25

Node Average Velocity (m/s)

Konstantinos Katsaros

32

30

35

Cross-Layer Designs (1)

Network layer with PHY and MAC: Use
channel/link quality information for routing decision
Link Residual Time
SNR info for MuiltiPoint Relay selection
MAC layer position information for prediction
MAC retransmissions
DeReHQ [1]: Delay, Reliability and Hop count
PROMPT [2]: Delay aware routing and robust MAC
MAC collaboration for heterogeneous networks
[1] Z. Niu, W. Yao, Q. Ni, and Y. Song, Study on QoS Support in 802.11e-based Multi-hop Vehicular
Wireless Ad Hoc Networks, in IEEE International Conference on Networking, Sensing and Control, pp.
705 710, 2007.
[2] B. Jarupan and E. Ekici, PROMPT: A cross-layer position-based communication protocol for delayaware vehicular access networks, Ad Hoc Networks, vol. 8, pp. 489505, July 2010.

Konstantinos Katsaros

33

Cross-Layer Designs (2)

Network layer with transport and
Application: Provide different levels of
priorities on packets
VTP (Vehicular Transport Protocol)
Optimization of TCP and GPSR with vehicle
mobility (adaptive beacon interval)

Network layer with multiple layers

Joint MAC, Network and Transport [1]
[1] L. Zhou, B. Zheng, B. Geller, a. Wei, S. Xu, and Y. Li, Cross-layer rate control, medium access
control and routing design in cooperative VANET, Computer Communications, vol. 31, pp. 2870
2882, July 2008

Konstantinos Katsaros

34

Location Services
Flooding based: All nodes host it
Proactive: DREAM
Reactive: LAR, MALM (mobility assisted)

Rendezvous based: Some nodes host it

Quorum: divide node set into two subsets (update and query)
Hashing (according to node ID or location): define server
nodes using a hash function
RLSMP (Region-based Location Service Management
Protocol) and MG-LSM (Mobile Group Location Service
Management) designed for VANETs utilizing mobility
information

Konstantinos Katsaros

35