1 / 13

Ad Hoc Networking via Named Data

Ad Hoc Networking via Named Data. Michael Meisel , Lixia Zhang UCLA Vasileios Pappas IBM Research ACM MobiArch 2010 Speaker : Conque, Kim cqkim@mmlab.snu.ac.kr. Outline. Introduction Existing solutions for ad hoc New direction of networking Listen First Broadcast Later (LFBL)

lucita
Télécharger la présentation

Ad Hoc Networking via Named Data

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. Ad Hoc Networking via Named Data Michael Meisel, Lixia Zhang UCLA Vasileios Pappas IBM Research ACM MobiArch 2010 Speaker : Conque, Kim cqkim@mmlab.snu.ac.kr

  2. Outline • Introduction • Existing solutions for ad hoc • New direction of networking • Listen First Broadcast Later (LFBL) • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Design of currentInternet protocol stack has a limit to adjust • Mandating that packet delivery is governed by the destination IP address • Reasons • Mobile network is infrastructural-free • Internet protocols are generally built with infrastructure support in mind • Node mobility introduces a high degree of dynamics in node interconnectivity

  4. Existing solutions for ad hoc • Existing routing protocols for ad hoc network • Proactive protocol: WRP, DSDV • Reactive protocol: DSR, AODV • Hybrid protocol: ZRP, HARP • Sharing features of the protocols • All features are not suitable for wireless channel using broadcast in nature • Using node assigned its own IP address • Routing based on the single best path to the given destination IP • For crossing each hop, controlling the signal range

  5. Failings of the current approaches • Assigning IP addresses to moving nodes is difficult • Hard to cover increasing number of mobile device through limited IP • Not available to fix the location and use aggregation • Considering Inherent trade-off between the accurary of routing and overhead to keep consistent is needed • Hard to decide which node will be the receiver

  6. Other solutions for ad hoc network • Opportunistic routing • ExOR and MORE • Delay Tolerant Networking (DTN) • Differences between DTN and NDN • Using unique name that are used directly for delivery • Automatically embracing ad-hoc networking and delay tolerant networking without adding functional modules

  7. New direction for mobile networking • Named Data Networking (NDN) • How to communicate using the 3-way exchange 1. Announcing the content name Contents Contents ~/Alice 2. Sending out ‘Interest’ packets

  8. Benefits of NDN • Changing the communication semantics from “where” to “what” • Data name carried on the node do not necessary change • Better than both landmark-based and geo-based routing solutions for ad hoc • Facilitating the security development in the architecture • End-to-end cryptographic signatures and encryption helps to make the data security better

  9. NDN for Ad hoc networking • Simplifying the implementation • Node can use application data name directly • Interest packets can be forwarded along multiple paths towards potential data location • Routing loop would not be caused, because PIT (Pending Interest Table) keeps track of interest • Addressing and caching fragments of application data • Available to accept the subsequent request for the same file or a request for the retransmission

  10. Listen First, Broadcast Later (LFBL) • New forwarding protocol for wireless ad hoc networks • Using variation of NDN`s 3-way exchange • The process of routing using LFBL 1. Nameprefix announcement Intermidiate nodes 3. Data return Listen First Broadcast Later 2. Interest forwarding as a response

  11. Evaluation of LFBL • To validate the performance of LFBL, comparing it with AODV on dynamic environment • Using four different metrics: RTT, Overhead, Delivery rate, Total data transferred • Result of the evaluation • LFBL delivers nearly 5times more data compared to AODV

  12. Evaluation of LFBL • Characteristic results for LFBL vs. AODV in detail

  13. Conclusion • Current routing solution for ad hoc networking has a pitfall in dealing with dynamic environment • Requiring the full or partial network topology for the computation of best routes • LFBL is a new forwarding protocol for the highly dynamic networks

More Related