Supporting the Brave New World of the 4As: Anytime, Anywhere, Anyhow and Anything Glenford Mapp Associate Professor Middlesex University United Kingdom NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 1

Outline of My Talk What is this new world really about What are the challenges Y-Comm – a bridge to this new world Collaborations What's new in my world Joining the revolution NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 2

Anytime, Anywhere Anytime Anywhere It's a generational thing Actually I want to be able to communicate from anywhere in the universe. So I will need to spawn networks and connect them to existing networks Building, managing and controlling networks should be under user control NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 3

Anyhow We are seeing the rise of new networks based on different technologies Wi-Fi, WiMax, 4G, Ultrawideband, Optical Networks, etc We are also seeing new types of networks Delay Tolerant Networks (DTNs) Home Networks, Personal Area Networks, VANETs – Vehicular networks Infrastructural networks: Sensor Networks E-Health Networks: Patient monitoring Social Networks:- Interaction between people NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 4

Anything Most important of all Content is King because a network is only useful if it is being used to carry information that people want Content is King Monitizing content – directly or indirectly - is the new El Dorado. A massive paradigm shift in terms of what the Internet is being used for: Multimedia, interactive games, real-time communication in all forms Low latency financial applications NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 5

The Key Challenges of Building this Brave New World Very different to the current Internet Support for mobility and location management is of primary importance Seamless, uninterrupted communication Handover must be controlled and managed Where you are may be used as a hint to where you may be in the future Proactive approach Know where network infrastructure is located Privacy of Location Information NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 6

Challenges in Networks How do we get networks to work together seamlessly Heterogeneous Networking Need a standard for ubiquitous handover between networks at a low level Need to allow higher levels (transport protocol/application) to adapt Multi-homing: managing all the network interfaces on a device NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 7

Challenges in QoS As traffic is increasing we need to look at some sort of Quality-of-Service support Lots of research into Internet QoS models IntServ:- failed because it could not scale DiffServ:- Works in the core network but not fine- grained enough to work on the periphery. Need a new approach NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 8

Challenges in Security Security must be also a key issue of the Future Internet Current Internet is woefully inadequate Edward Snowden Multi-level security Authentication, authorization Denial of Service attacks Privacy (use of the net not monitored) Security needs to be built in from the start NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 9

Challenges of Big Data New networks are producing data faster than we can analyse, categorize or process Storage will also become a big issue Data Security: who owns my data in the Cloud, who can access my data, do I have any say where the data is stored Results of Big Data Information is now gold NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 10

Challenges of Service Delivery Delivering services will also need to change Services need to be managed in a more autonomous manner Spawn new server instances at different locations or migrate services when required in response to: Geographical load patterns User mobility Network failure or recovery NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 11

Challenges of Different Types of Networking Opportunistic Networking Taking advantage of social interaction; sensor networks Move towards more data-centric paradigms Current Internet still communication-centric Stresses host-to-host communication Information Centric Networking Getting information – irrespective of location Publish and subscribe models NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 12

Meeting these challenges Need an integrated approach Cannot study one challenge in isolation Failure is not an option Internet is the most successful thing that humans have made; the wheel is a distant second Problems are building up and need to be addressed Affects all of us No country, institution or company should be in total control of the Internet NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 13

How are we going to make this happen – what is the approach Revolutionary Approach Start from scratch Clean Slate Project; Plan 9 test Evolutionary Approach Only incremental increases IPv6, INTERNET 2 Challenges mean that an evolutionary jump is needed NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 14

How are we going to make this happen – what is the approach Try what has worked before Agree on functionality; but not on implementation Need a framework that gives us functionality but not say how the functionality is implemented Worked for telephony; 3KHz standard Worked for the Internet: OSI; TCP/IP NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 15

Why do you need a framework? To be able to think about the issues coherently Imposes mental discipline Forces you to always keep the Big Picture in mind Separates functionality/policy from mechanism Frees us to: Use or enhance existing mechanisms/standards Only design new mechanisms when needed NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 16

PERIPHERAL NETWORK SECURITY LAYERS CORE NETWORK SAS SERVICE PLATFORM APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTS SAS SERVICE PLATFORM QOS LAYER QBS NETWORK QOS LAYER END SYSTEM TRANSPORT NTS CORE TRANSPORT NAS MOBILITY MANAGEMENT NETWORK MANAGEMENT HANDOVER MANAGEMENT CONFIGURATION LAYER NETWORK ABSTRACTION (MOBILE NODE) NETWORK ABSTRACTION (BASE STATION) HARDWARE PLATFORM (MOBILE NODE) HARDWARE PLATFORM (BASE STATION) 17

A very brief Introduction to Y-Comm This is not a talk about Y-Comm Talks, papers at: http://www.mdx.ac.uk/research/science_technology /informatics/projects/ycomm.aspx In essence Y-Comm is an architecture that is trying to integrate: Communication Mobility QoS Security NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 18

Y-Comm: Still a work in progress It is not the only architecture that is being studied Ambient networks Mobile Ethernet Y-Comm is by far: The most detailed The most integrated Architecture is stable Recently tweaked some names of the layers to make their functionality better understood by the mobile telcoms community NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 19

Why is Y-Comm different Y-Comm was predicated on two key assumptions: Network Evolution The Internet is decomposing into 2 components A super-fast core using Optical Switching/MPLS Wireless Peripheral Networks at the Edge Devices will have multiple Interfaces 3/4G, Wi-Fi, WiMax, etc Called HETNET devices Both the assumptions turned out to be true NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 20

Future Internet Current Internet BACKBONE ACCESS NETWORKS WIRELESS NETWORKS 21

The Core Framework SERVICE PLATFORM LAYER NETWORK QOS LAYER CORE TRANSPORT SYSTEM NETWORK MANAGEMENT LAYER CONFIGURATION LAYER NETWORK ABSTRACTION LAYER HARDWARE PLATFORM LAYER 22

The Peripheral Framework APPLICATION ENVIRONMENTS LAYER QOS LAYER END TRANSPORT SYSTEM MOBILITY MANAGEMENT LAYER HANDOVER MANAGEMENT LAYER NETWORK ABSTRACTION LAYER HARDWARE PLATFORM LAYER 23

History of Y-Comm Pre-Y-Comm (1998-2003) Cambridge Wireless Testbed 2006 – Peripheral Framework announced 2007 – Y-Comm architecture announced 2008 – USP & UFSCar join effort 2010 – Loughborough University joins effort 2012 – Lancaster University joins effort NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 24

Key People in Y-Comm Glenford Mapp (Middlesex University) Jon Crowcroft (University of Cambridge) Edson Moreira (USP) Helio Guardia (UFSCar) Raphael Phan (Loughborough University) Qiang Ni (Lancaster University) NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 25

Key PhD students Fatema Shaikh (Middlesex University 2010) David Cottingham (University of Cambridge 2010) Renata Porto Vanni (USP 2010) Mahdi Aiash (Middlesex University 2012) Rigolin Lopes (USP 2012) Mario Augusto (USP 2012) Fragkiskos Sardis (Middlesex University) Ann Samuels (Middlesex University) NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 26

Key Middlesex MSc Students Diti Dave (2010) Naveen Chinnam (2011) Ali Mofidizati (2012) Rajesh Lakkineni (2012) Brian Ondiege (2012) Eghe Akenuwa (2013) Eric Ghokeng (2013) NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 27

What are the major contributions of Y-Comm so far Handover Handover Classification; Proactive vertical handover, Calculations for NDT and TBVH Security Integrated Security; Targeted Security Models; Ontologies for Communication Architectures Y-Comm Ontology, MyHand Quality-of-Service New QoS Framework NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 28

Things being worked on – NOT part of this talk An implementation of IEEE 802.21 To provide seamless handover (UFSCar) Game Theory in Communication Systems To see if game-theory can lead to optimum resource allocation (Lancaster University) A new transport protocol for LANs To optimize server speeds in LANs and Clouds (Middlesex University) A Hybrid Internet QoS model Combining IntServ and DiffServ (Middlesex University NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 29

End of Y-Comm Part Y-Comm has been a success because it has provided a framework to allow us to begin to exploring how to support the 4As Just a start; still a very long way to go before we get to this new world Y-Comm has moved from the design/architectural phase to the implementation phase Exploring using Software Defined Networking (SDN) as a way of building a full Y-Comm prototype NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 30

Questions on Y-Comm NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 31

Going Deep In this section we want to look at how a section of the work in Y-Comm is impacting 3 key areas: Resource Management in Core Networks Mobile Services VANETs Need to understand proactive handover in Y- Comm NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 32

Basic Handover Terms Hard vs Soft Handover Network vs Client Handovers Hard:- break before make Soft:- make before break Network vs Client Handovers Network-based Client-based (Apple's Patent) Upward vs Downward Upward – smaller to bigger coverage Downward – bigger to smaller coverage NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 33

Handover Classification ALTERNATIVE IMPERATIVE NETPREF SERVICES REACTIVE USERPREF CONTEXT PROACTIVE UNANTICIPATED ANTICIPATED MODEL-BASED KNOWLEDGE-BASED 34

Knowledge-Based Proactive Handover (Cambridge) 35

Model Based Proactive Handover The work of Fatema Shaikh Define a circular area of coverage called the Handover radius Define a smaller radius called the Exit Radius at which handover must start in order for the handover to be completed at the Handover Radius The time the mobile node has before it hits the Exit Radius is called Time Before Vertical Handover or TBVH NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 36

Model-Based Handover NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 37

Predictive Mathematical Model for TBVH (Simple Case) Movement of MS under BBS coverage (upward vertical handoff) Introduction of additional functionality to Base Station at network boundary (BBS). Distance between MS and BBS derived from location co-ordinates or Estimated TBVH 38 38

Simulation and Results TBVH simulation in OPNET Modeler: 39

Why is TBVH important If the Mobility Management Layer can calculate TBVH, it can signal to the higher layers that a handover will occur after a certain time so these layers can take action. Minimize the effects of handover delay and packet loss by buffering and using fast retransmission techniques It makes proactive handovers more seamless compared to reactive handovers Can Fatema Shaikh's work be extended to any arbitrary situation? NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 40

Combining Transport and Communications to determine the optimum handover NET A A NET B S NET C B C T 41

Analysis shows that it is possible to calculate these key points with some degree of accuracy Z1 A Y1 Y3 H1 C2 S B E2 C H3 E3 H2 T Z2 Z3 42

Results 43

What does it all mean? If the mobile node knows: its location, direction and velocity Via GPS or accelerometers The location of the networking infrastructure Type of access network, the position of the access points Good estimation of the Handover Radius Then we can calculate the optimal times to handover over a large region (a few miles) NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 44

REQ (Time , TBVH, NDT) WIRELESS A NETWORK A B REQ (Time , TBVH, NDT) B 45

Rethink Allocation Strategy MNA needs channel at (Time + TBVH) A MNA releases channel at (Time + TBVH + NDT)A MNB needs channel at (Time + TBVH)B MNB releases channel at (Time + TBVH + NDT)B NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 46

There are 3 possible outcomes No contention: (Time + TBVH)A < (Time + TBVH)B (Time + TBVH + NDT)A < (Time + TBVH)B Contention: Two Types: Partial and Total (Time + TBVH + NDT)A > (Time + TBVH)B Partial Contention: Total Contention: (Time + TBVH + NDT)A < (Time + TBVH + NDT)B (Time + TBVH + NDT)A >= (Time + TBVH + NDT)B NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 47

Request Summary Requests granted as requested: Channel granted at (Time + TVBH)A Channel released at (Time + TBVH + NDT)A Same with B Requests granted but modified for B Channel granted at (Time + TBVH + NDT)A Channel released at (Time + TBVH + NDT)B Request for B not granted: Force B to handover to another network NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 48

Further Results Simulation results show that there is a clear benefit to using this approach Nodes that can use the channel are not forced to wait behind nodes that cannot use the channel Nodes that cannot use the channel quickly handover to other networks so we avoid unnecessary handover attempts Good result for operators NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 49

Mobile Services PhD research by Fragkiskos Sardis General idea: as the users of a service move around the latency between the user and the service could increase such that the user's QoE could be affected A way around this is to be able to migrate or replicate the service at a location closer to the mobile user to reduce latency Cloud Services now make this possible NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 50

Key Issues What is the condition that indicates that movement of the server should be considered Latency/Bandwidth Threshold What is the algorithm which decides to which Cloud should the service be migrated or replicated There is a cost for moving the service which cannot be ignored We need a service delivery framework NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 51

The Service Delivery Framework SERVICE MANAGEMENT LAYER SERVICE SUBSCRIPTION LAYER SERVICE DELIVERY LAYER SERVICE MIGRATION LAYER SERVICE CONNECTION LAYER NETWORK ABSTRACTION LAYER 52

Key Observation Whether I move the service to a Cloud on the network to which the user is currently connected depends on how long the user is expected to be in that network Network Dwell Time or NDT So the win is: The bytes saved running the service locally – the bytes needed to migrate the service First parameter is dependent on NDT NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 53

How could we test this We set up a gaming scenario between a mobile device and two Clouds. We begin playing the game on one Cloud and then signal to the system to migrate the game to the second Cloud. When we migrate to the new network, we measure the bytes saved vs the amount of time I am in the network of the second Cloud NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 54

Results NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 55

Further Work NDT is crucial for good migration of services We are developing a Markov Chain model for service migration Looking at caching content as well We now move on to the final part of this talk Seamless communication in VANETs NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 56

VANETs VANETs are important because they are the key components for building an Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure (ITS) ITS involves the integration of the Communication and Transport Infrastructure Improve safety on the road Crash Avoidance, Accident Notification Infotainment in vehicles ITS is part of Smart Cities research NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 57

VANET Infrastructure VANET Hardware V2I communication Roadside Units (RSUs) Onboard Units (OBUs) V2I communication RSU ↔ OBU (Middlesex University) V2V communication OBU ↔ OBU (USP) Beaconing V2I or V2V NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 58

Seamless V2I The work of PhD student Arindam Ghosh How do you guarantee seamless communication between the car and the infrastructure Seamless handover situation but slightly different Velocities may be high Beaconing effect Frequency and size of beacon Interested in proactive handover NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 59

Our Approach is to look at 3 phases of Communication Data Exchange Phase Not concerned about handover Can only see 1 RSU Doing calculation for handover Determining Exit Time to start handover Doing the Handover All must be done before I leave the first network, i.e., before NDT expires NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 60

Scenario NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 61

Use Y-Comm Approach to Calculate NDT A good approximate for NDT is NDT ~ 2R/v R = Radius of coverage of RSU V = velocity of the vehicle. This is an ideal NDT because it is only based on coverage, it assumes no interference between RSU and RSU or OBU and OBU Measure NDT using simulation and find out how close we get to the ideal NDT and how this result is affected by other factors NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 62

Simulation Scenario NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 63

Results show that: The higher the beaconing frequency the greater the NDT from 1Hz ->10 Hz The size of the beacon also affects the measured NDT Velocity also affects NDT severely. The greater the velocity the less NDT is available. Also measured the effect of velocity on data- transfer rates (non-linear) NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 64

Data Exchange Rates at Different Speeds NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 65

Summary VANET is a new area for us Using NDT is a new appoach Interesting results Hoping to develop an analytical model Need to consider other factors Traffic density, interference, etc. NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 66

Joining the Revolution Join a work that has just started Hybrid QoS Internet Model IEEE 802.21 implementation Proactive Channel Allocation VANET Or explore a total new area in Y-Comm Programmable Networking SDN and Open Flow ICN NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 67

THANKS FOR LISTENING ANY QUESTIONS? NOVEMBER 2013 WTD-ICMC-USP 68