ProbeCast: MANET Admission Control via Probing Soon Y. Oh, Gustavo Marfia, and Mario Gerla Dept. of Computer Science, UCLA Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA {soonoh,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Winter 2004 UCSC CMPE252B1 CMPE 257: Wireless and Mobile Networking SET 3f: Medium Access Control Protocols.
Advertisements

1 Traffic Engineering (TE). 2 Network Congestion Causes of congestion –Lack of network resources –Uneven distribution of traffic caused by current dynamic.
Content Centric Networking in Tactical and Emergency MANETs Soon Y. Oh, Davide Lau, and Mario Gerla Computer Science Department University of California,
End-to-End Fair Bandwidth Allocation in Multi-hop Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Baochun Li Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering University of Toronto.
Wireless MACs (reprise): Overlay MAC Brad Karp UCL Computer Science CS 4C38 / Z25 24 th January, 2006.
Distributed Control Algorithms for Service Differentiation in Wireless Packet Networks Michael Barry, Andrew T Campbell, Andras Veres
An Interest-Driven Approach to Integrated Unicast and Multicast Routing in MANETs Rolando Menchaca-Mendez J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves 280N Seminar: 4/28/2008.
Receiver-driven Layered Multicast S. McCanne, V. Jacobsen and M. Vetterli University of Calif, Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory SIGCOMM.
Monday, June 01, 2015 ARRIVE: Algorithm for Robust Routing in Volatile Environments 1 NEST Retreat, Lake Tahoe, June
Receiver-driven Layered Multicast S. McCanne, V. Jacobsen and M. Vetterli SIGCOMM 1996.
Scalable Team Multicast in Wireless Ad hoc networks Exploiting Coordinated Motion Mario Gerla University of California, Los Angeles.
Random Access MAC for Efficient Broadcast Support in Ad Hoc Networks Ken Tang, Mario Gerla Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles.
1 Network-supported Rate Control Mechanism for Multicast Streaming Media Kiyohide NAKAUCHI, Hiroyuki MORIKAWA, and Tomonori AOYAMA, School of Engineering,
Comparing flow-oblivious and flow-aware adaptive routing Sara Oueslati and Jim Roberts France Telecom R&D CISS 2006 Princeton March 2006.
Multiple constraints QoS Routing Given: - a (real time) connection request with specified QoS requirements (e.g., Bdw, Delay, Jitter, packet loss, path.
Muhammad Mahmudul Islam Ronald Pose Carlo Kopp School of Computer Science & Software Engineering Monash University, Australia.
E-ODMRP: Enhanced ODMRP with Motion Adaptive Refresh Soon Y. Oh, Joon-Sang Park, Mario Gerla Computer Science Dept. UCLA.
Fair Sharing of MAC under TCP in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Mario Gerla Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA.
MIMO-CAST: A CROSS-LAYER AD HOC MULTICAST PROTOCOL USING MIMO RADIOS Soon Y. Oh*, Mario Gerla*, Pengkai Zhao**, Babak Daneshrad** *Computer Science Dept.,
The Impact of Multihop Wireless Channel on TCP Throughput and Loss Presented by Scott McLaren Zhenghua Fu, Petros Zerfos, Haiyun Luo, Songwu Lu, Lixia.
Enhancing TCP Fairness in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks Using Neighborhood RED Prenseted by Ronak Bhuta Date : October 9, 2007 Kaixin Xu Mario Gerla Lantao.
Adaptive Self-Configuring Sensor Network Topologies ns-2 simulation & performance analysis Zhenghua Fu Ben Greenstein Petros Zerfos.
AdHoc Probe: Path Capacity Probing in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Ling-Jyh Chen, Tony Sun, Guang Yang, M.Y. Sanadidi, Mario Gerla Computer Science Department,
Interference-Aware QoS OLSR for Mobile Ad-hoc Network Routing SAWN 2005, May 24 P. Minet & D-Q. Nguyen.
How to Turn on The Coding in MANETs Chris Ng, Minkyu Kim, Muriel Medard, Wonsik Kim, Una-May O’Reilly, Varun Aggarwal, Chang Wook Ahn, Michelle Effros.
Enhancing TCP Fairness in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks Using Neighborhood RED Kaixin Xu, Mario Gerla University of California, Los Angeles {xkx,
MIMO and TCP: A CASE for CROSS LAYER DESIGN Soon Y. Oh, Mario Gerla Computer Science Dept. University of California, Los Angeles {soonoh,
MAC Reliable Broadcast in Ad Hoc Networks Ken Tang, Mario Gerla University of California, Los Angeles (ktang,
Interference-aware QoS Routing (IQRouting) for Ad-Hoc Networks Rajarshi Gupta, Zhanfeng Jia, Teresa Tung, and Jean Walrand Dept of EECS, UC Berkeley Globecom.
1 Algorithms for Bandwidth Efficient Multicast Routing in Multi-channel Multi-radio Wireless Mesh Networks Hoang Lan Nguyen and Uyen Trang Nguyen Presenter:
First item planned. Add more text as necessary. Second item planned. Add more text as necessary. Add other points as necessary Topic/project/effort description.
TCP Behavior across Multihop Wireless Networks and the Wired Internet Kaixin Xu, Sang Bae, Mario Gerla, Sungwook Lee Computer Science Department University.
Network Coding vs. Erasure Coding: Reliable Multicast in MANETs Atsushi Fujimura*, Soon Y. Oh, and Mario Gerla *NEC Corporation University of California,
BMWnet Wshnt.kuas.edu.tw Mesh Networks Prof. W.S. Hwang.
Bell Labs Advanced Technologies EMEAAT Proprietary Information © 2004 Lucent Technologies1 Overview contributions for D27 Lucent Netherlands Richa Malhotra.
CSC 336 Data Communications and Networking Lecture 8d: Congestion Control : RSVP Dr. Cheer-Sun Yang Spring 2001.
A Simple and Effective Cross Layer Networking System for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Wing Ho Yuen, Heung-no Lee and Timothy Andersen.
“Intra-Network Routing Scheme using Mobile Agents” by Ajay L. Thakur.
Enhancing TCP Fairness in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks using Neighborhood RED Kaixin Xu, Mario Gerla UCLA Computer Science Department
Enhancing TCP Fairness in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks Using Neighborhood RED Kaixin Xu, Mario Gerla University of California, Los Angeles {xkx,
Improving QoS Support in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Agenda Motivations Proposed Framework Packet-level FEC Multipath Routing Simulation Results Conclusions.
Fair Sharing of MAC under TCP in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Mario Gerla Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA.
Mario Gerla and Gianluca Reali Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) IP DiffServ.
End-to-End Performance and Fairness in Multihop Wireless Backhaul Networks V. Gambiroza, B. Sadeghi, and E. Knightly Department of Electrical and Computer.
PLASMA: A New Routing Paradigm for Wireless Multihop Networks R. Laufer 1 P. Velloso 2 L. Vieira 3 L. Kleinrock 1 1 University of California, Los Angeles.
Multicast ad hoc networks Multicast in ad hoc nets Multicast in ad hoc nets Review of Multicasting in wired networks Review of Multicasting in wired networks.
1 SmartGossip: An Adaptive Broadcast Service for Wireless Sensor Networks Presented By Thomas H. Hand Duke University Adapted from: “ SmartGossip: An Adaptive.
S Master’s thesis seminar 8th August 2006 QUALITY OF SERVICE AWARE ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE AD HOC NETWORKS Thesis Author: Shan Gong Supervisor:Sven-Gustav.
Providing End-to-End Delay Guarantees for Multi-hop Wireless Sensor Networks I-Hong Hou.
Localized Algorithm for Aggregate Fairness in Wireless Sensor Networks Authors : Shigang Chen, Zhan Zhang CISE university of Florida CISE university of.
TCP with Variance Control for Multihop IEEE Wireless Networks Jiwei Chen, Mario Gerla, Yeng-zhong Lee.
SenProbe: Path Capacity Estimation in Wireless Sensor Networks Tony Sun, Ling-Jyh Chen, Guang Yang M. Y. Sanadidi, Mario Gerla.
Qos support and adaptive video. QoS support in ad hoc networks MAC layer techniques: – e - alternation of contention based and contention free periods;
UCLA ENGINEERING Computer Science RobustGeo: a Disruption-Tolerant Geo-routing Protocol Ruolin Fan, Yu-Ting Yu *, Mario Gerla UCLA, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
We hope that it is more important to know where you are going than to get there quickly. SNU INC Lab. A Survey of Energy Efficient Network Protocols for.
Multipath TCP in a Lossy ad hoc Wireless Network Medhocnet 2004 Bodrum, June 2004 Jiwei Chen, Kaixin Xu, Mario Gerla UCLA.
1 Packet Radio Networks Fixed or mobile nodes that communicate via radios –Advantages: »Fast (re) deployment and set-up of network »Ability to support.
SHORT: Self-Healing and Optimizing Routing Techniques for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Presenter: Sheng-Shih Wang October 30, 2003 Chao Gui and Prasant Mohapatra.
On Mitigating the Broadcast Storm Problem with Directional Antennas Sheng-Shih Wang July 14, 2003 Chunyu Hu, Yifei Hong, and Jennifer Hou Dept. of Electrical.
2006 QoS Routing and Forwarding Benefits of QoS Routing  Without QoS routing: –must probe path & backtrack; non optimal path, control traffic and processing.
SERENA: SchEduling RoutEr Nodes Activity in wireless ad hoc and sensor networks Pascale Minet and Saoucene Mahfoudh INRIA, Rocquencourt Le Chesnay.
Reliable Adaptive Lightweight Multicast Protocol Ken Tang, Scalable Network Technologies Katia Obraczka, UC Santa Cruz Sung-Ju Lee, Hewlett-Packard Laboratories.
Courtesy Piggybacking: Supporting Differentiated Services in Multihop Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Wei LiuXiang Chen Yuguang Fang WING Dept. of ECE University.
A Bidirectional Multi-channel MAC Protocol for Improving TCP Performance on Multihop Wireless Ad Hoc Networks Tianbo Kuang and Carey Williamson Department.
Routing Metrics for Wireless Mesh Networks
Kaixin Xu, Mario Gerla University of California, Los Angeles {xkx,
Emergency Related Video Streaming in VANETs using Network Coding
TCP and MAC interplay in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks
Routing Metrics for Wireless Mesh Networks
The Impact of Multihop Wireless Channel on TCP Performance
Presentation transcript:

ProbeCast: MANET Admission Control via Probing Soon Y. Oh, Gustavo Marfia, and Mario Gerla Dept. of Computer Science, UCLA Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA {soonoh, gmarfia,

Introduction  Multicast “inelastic” streams  Inelastic flow - the rate cannot be elastically controlled (unlike TCP)  Real time flows: situation awareness dissemination; surveillance data/video, etc  Important in tactical/emergency MANETs  Traditional resource reservation ineffective in MANETs  Bookkeeping is very cumbersome in multicast (as number of destinations increases);  Also, mobility requires continuous re-adjustments  Without reservations:  Flow allocation can be “unfair”  possible capture  Network may get congested 2

3 Unfairness Example (unicast)  3 parallel inelastic flows; 500Kbps each  Interference between Flow 1 and 2 and Flow 2 and 3

Goal & Contribution  Achieving reliable QoS support of inelastic flows (e.g., video and audio stream)  ProbeCast:  Enable Call Admission Control and fair allocation of inelastic flows in MANETs without requiring prior resource reservation 4

ProbeCast: key insights  Insight #1: Resource Probing  No a priori resource allocation  Rather “probe” for resources to see if available  Insight #2: Pruning via Back-pressure  Back-pressure (“prune”) toward the source when resource is unavailable  Re-route or reject the inelastic flow  Insight #3: Neighborhood Proportional Drop (NPROD)  Local rate balancing using proportional dropping  Enforces fair channel sharing  “fair back-pressure” 5

ProbeCast: Example 6 Proportional Drop Backpressure (Pruning)

ProbeCast: Probing  Assumptions:  End-to-End FEC – e.g. erasure coding – always ON  Each flow has packet drop threshold (say, 20%), beyond which the flow must be back-pressured  Probing  Each node measures own packet drop rate  It broadcasts to one hop neighbors own drop rate via piggybacking on data packets 7

8  The node estimates packet drop probability DP F for each flow F  It broadcasts to one hop neighbors the DP F value

ProbeCast: N-PROD  Neighborhood Proportional Drop (N-PROD)  Distributed fairness scheme  First introduced and evaluated in FairCast (MSWIM 2008)  Overhearing neighbors’ drop probabilities  Enforcing proportional drop among flows competing in the same contention domain  Forced drop from the queue  After transient, nodes in the same contention domain converge to fair share of the channel 9

ProbeCast: Pruning  Pruning  Flow Drop based on Threshold  Threshold is traffic class and flow age dependent;  Drop Threshold stamped in packet header  Typically, incoming flow has lower threshold than incumbent  When drop rate is > threshold, a flow is backpressured  BckPr signal piggybacked on data packets whenever possible  Upstream node in turn will backpressure when all “children” have sent BckPr signal  Source action (upon receiving backpressure signal):  Re-route if there is alternate route;  Otherwise reject the flow 10

ProbeCast Example (A)Three flows in the same contention domain. Bar graphs shows packet delivery ratios (B)Flow 3 starts transmitting and other flows’ rate decreases (N-PROD). (C)Since Flow 3 drop rate exceeds the threshold, it is backpressured. 11

Simulation  Simulation setup  Qualnet simulations  Radio range 376m; 2Mbps capacity; b  512B packets; 50KB queue in each node  Topologies  Three parallel flows  30 nodes uniformly distributed in a 1000x1000m field  Experiments  N-PROD: to show proportional fairness  ProbeCast: to show proper rejection 12

Three Parallel Flow Topology S2 R3 R2 S3 F3 F2 R1F1 S1 Flow 3 Flow 2 Flow 1 Source Forwarder Receiver  F1, F2, and F3 are within the same contention domain  No interference between sources and forwarders  No interference between forwarders and receivers  Staggered Transmission starts: 1s, 10s, 20s 13

Three Even Parallel Flows  Uniform nominal rate = 500Kpbs  Flows 2 has higher packet drop rate without N-PROD  N-PROD restores fairness 14

Three Even Parallel Flows (cont)  Uniform nominal rate = 500Kpbs  Aggregated throughput of the three flows  Fairness comes at the cost of degraded total throughput 15

Three Uneven Parallel Flows  Flow1 = 800Kbps, Flow2 = 400Kbps, and Flow3=200Kbps  Without N-PROD, Flow 1 and 3 capture the channel  With N-PROD proportional drop yields 8:4:2 ratio 16

Three Uneven Parallel Flows (cont)  Aggregated throughput of 3 flows  Flow1 = 800Kbps, Flow2 = 400Kbps, and Flow3=200Kbps  Proportional fairness again comes at the cost of degraded total throughput 17

Two Flows in Random Topology  30 nodes in 1000 by 1000 meter  Flow 1: 200Kbps video stream, 9 members  Flow 2: 40Kbps audio stream, 3 members 18 Session 2 Session 1 Session 2

Two Flows in Random Topology  Session 1 captures channel in ODMRP so session 2 starves  N-PROD achieves fairness  All members in session 1 and 2 receive more than 50% packets  Drop Threshold = 50% 19

Three Flows in Random Topology  Three multicast sessions, each session has 1 source and 3 members  30 nodes in 1000 by 1000 meter  Data transmission starts Session1 T=1s, Session2 T=10s, and Session3 T=20s  500Kbps traffic; drop threshold = 50% 20 Session 1 Session 2 Session 3

Three Flows in Random Topology (cont)  Three multicast sessions compete within the same collision domain  Session 2 is rejected (it came after Session 1 - initially lower threshold) 21

Conclusion  N-PROD achieves proportional bandwidth share in the same contention domain  ProbeCast uses probing and backpressure to accept feasible flows and reject unfeasible ones.  Probecast can also handle inelastic unicast (a special case of multicast) 22