Download
group communications in mobile ad hoc networks n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Group Communications in Mobile Ad hoc Networks PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Group Communications in Mobile Ad hoc Networks

Group Communications in Mobile Ad hoc Networks

202 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Group Communications in Mobile Ad hoc Networks

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Group Communications in Mobile Ad hoc Networks Jian Li http://networks.cs.ucdavis.edu/~lijian/slides/ecs257/

  2. References • P. Mohapatra, C. Gui, and J. Li. Group Communications in Mobile Ad hoc Networks. IEEE Computer Magazine, Feb. 2004, pp. 52-59.

  3. Agenda • Introduction • Group Comm. Models • Multicasting • Broadcasting • Geocasting & Anycasting • Common Issues • Reliability • Energy efficiency • QoS • Security • Concluding Remarks

  4. Manet • No infrastructure, ad hoc deployment • Nodes are free to move around • Wireless media • Multihop routing • Various potential applications • Group Communication is a critical building block

  5. Group Comm. In Manet • Differ from wireline networks • Wireless medium has varying characteristics • Signal strength and propagation fluctuation w.r.t time and place • Node mobility is unpredictable • Changing topology • Limited resources • Bandwidth, battery, CPU, memory, etc

  6. Multicasting: Exploiting Characteristics of Manet • Variable topology • Mesh-based protocols • Soft-state & state aggregation • Stateless multicast • Knowledge of location • Location aided multicast • Randomness • Gossip-based multicast

  7. Mesh-based Protocols • Core-Assisted Mesh Protocol (CAMP) • On-demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP)

  8. CAMP: Features • Assume the underlying unicast routing protocol can provide correct distance to known destination within a finite time • Ensure reverse shortest paths from receivers to sources are part of a group’s mesh • Anchor • Neighbor nodes which are required to re-broadcast any non-duplicate data packets they receive

  9. CAMP: Operation • Consult a neighbor table • Confirm membership via a CAMP-UPDATE • Otherwise, JOIN-REQUEST packet is sent • JOIN-ACK received • Receiver nodes periodically reviews packet cache to determine whether it is receiving data packets from those neighbors are on the reverse shortest path • Nodes periodically choose their “anchors”

  10. ODMRP: Features • A Mesh-Based & On-Demand protocol • Forwarding group concept • A group of nodes participating in multicast packet forwarding • Robustness to host mobility • Scalability to large number of nodes • Provide path redundancy • Join table, Member table

  11. ODMRP – Protocol Overview • Join table • The table broadcasted by each multicast receiver and forwarding node to establish / update group memberships and routes • Member table • The table maintained by multicast receivers containing information of multicast sources for each multicast group it is associated with • Suffers from excessive control packet transmission overhead • Control Packets • JOIN-REQ, JOIN-TABLE

  12. s | i s r j i n k m

  13. State Maintenance • Unconstrained state • Both member and non-member • Constrained state • Through abstraction via application-layer multicasting • By aggregation via hierarchical multicasting • Zero state • No state information is maintained

  14. Location Aided Multicasting • ODMRP • can utilize location and mobility information to estimate route lifetime • Position Based Multicasting (PBM) • Greedy forwarding • Perimeter forwarding

  15. Gossip-based Multicasting • Anonymous Gossip (AG) • Route Driven Gossip (RDG)

  16. Anonymous Gossip • Enhancement technique atop any tree- or mesh-based protocol • A member node does not know any other member nodes • Two phases • Data packets are multicast to the group • Anonymous gossip in the background: attempt to recover lost data packets from other group members

  17. Route Driven Gossip (RDG) • Rely on an underlying unicasting protocol for guidance • CSMA/CA MAC (e.g., IEEE 802.11) provides reliable, sequenced single-hop unicast by RTS/CTS–Data/Ack handshake sequence

  18. RDG: Data Structures and Operations Data Structures Operations 4 5 0 1 5 0 5 JOIN Identifier RECEIVEGREQUEST Group identifier • Data buffer • new • old RECEIVEGREPLY 0 5 1 0 5 GOSSIP 0 3 RECEIVEGOSSIP • View • active • passive • remove LEAVE quiescence threshold τq fanoutF 2 1 0 1 1 Push Pull Data packets, digests of missing packets, view

  19. Broadcasting • Important building block for on demand route discovery • Categorizations • Simple flooding • Probability based broadcasting • Area-based broadcasting • Neighbor knowledge based broadcasting

  20. Self pruning • Information: • Hello message (1-hop) • Piggyback adjacent node list in broadcast packets (2-hop) • Store adjacent node list in cache • Forwarding node decision: • Node vj who receives the packet from vi checks whether the set N(vj)-N(vi)-{vi} is empty vj vi

  21. Geocasting • Group membership is defined by geographical coordinates • Suitable for delivering messages to every node in a specific area • Examples • Flooding based geocasting • Route based geocasting

  22. LBM: Flooding based Geocasting • Scheme I

  23. LBM: Flooding based Geocasting • Scheme II

  24. Route Based Geocasting: GeoTORA • Based on TORA • Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm • Destination-oriented directed acyclic graphs (DAGs) • Uses “Link-Reversal” techniques to maintain DAGs • GeoTORA • Modify TORA to do anycasting • Modify further to do geocasting

  25. B B C C A D A D G G F F E E B B C C A D A D G G F F E E TORA – Link Reversal • When a node has no downstream links, it reverses the direction of one or more links

  26. Anycasting with Modified TORA • In GeoTORA, the TORA protocol is modified to be able to perform anycast • Anycast - deliver to any one node in the anycast group • Protocol • Maintain a DAG for eachanycast group • Make each member of the anycast group a sink • No logical direction for links between sinks • Following the directed links results in packets being delivered to any onesink

  27. Anycasting Example Anycast group = {A, B, C, D}, DAG structure for the anycast group K K K L L L C D C D C D A B A B A B G J J J G G F F F E E E

  28. K Geocast Region L C D A B G J F E Geocasting using Modified Anycasting • Small variation on the previous anycasting • All nodes within a specified geocasting region are made sinks • Maintain a single DAG for a given geocast group • Source first performs an anycast to the geocast group members • When a group member receives a packet, it floods it within the geocast region

  29. Common Issues • Reliability • Energy efficiency • Qualify of service • Security

  30. Reliability • Clustering structure + acknowledgement along reversal path • Probabilistic reliability • RDG approach • Reliable MAC support • BMW protocol

  31. Energy Efficiency: Routing • Wireless transmissions are major energy consumers • Protocols attempt to reduce forwarding set of nodes • Broadcast Incremental Power (BIP) protocol • Add new node one at a time • Increment transmission power to add one new node

  32. Energy Efficiency: MAC • Reception and idle-listening also major energy consumers • Power aware MAC • Example: PAMAS MAC • Separate signaling channel • Turn off nodes when appropriate • Overhear RTS/CTS to determine when to sleep, for how long, • What to do if destination node is asleep?

  33. Energy Efficiency: Wakeup Mechanisms • On-demand wakeup • Use a wakeup tone • Scheduled wakeup • Require synchronization among nodes • Asynchronous wakeup • Guaranteed overlap active time over a certain duration

  34. Quality of Service • A set of measurable service attributes • Bandwidth, delay, loss rate • Power consumption, service coverage • QoS support are desirable in various applications • Resource limitation and variability add to the need of QoS support • QoS aware group comm. Remains an open problem

  35. Security • Broadcast medium is more prone to active and passive attacks • Dynamic nature of Manet adds to the challenges • Lack of trusted centralized infrastructure • Ad hoc link • Group comm. models are different • Light weight requirement • Also an open problem

  36. Concluding Remarks • Group Communication is essential for ad hoc networks • More efforts are needed • MAC • Transport • QoS • Security