1. 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

2. 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

3. 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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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

15. 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

16. 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

17. 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

18. A very brief Introduction to Y-Comm
This is not a talk about Y-Comm
Talks, papers at: /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

19. 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

20. 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

21. Future Internet Current Internet BACKBONE ACCESS NETWORKS
WIRELESS NETWORKS 21

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

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

24. 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

25. 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

26. 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

27. 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

28. 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

29. Things being worked on – NOT part of this talk
An implementation of IEEE
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

30. 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

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

32. 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

33. 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

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

35. Knowledge-Based Proactive Handover (Cambridge)35

36. 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

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

38. 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

39. Simulation and Results
TBVH simulation in OPNET Modeler: 39

40. 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

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

42. Analysis shows that it is possible to calculate these key points with some degree of accuracyZ1 A Y1 Y3 H1 C2 S B E2 C H3 E3 H2 T Z2 Z3 42

43. Results 43

44. 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

45. REQ (Time , TBVH, NDT) WIRELESS A NETWORK A B REQ (Time , TBVH, NDT) B45

46. 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

47. 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

48. 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

49. 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

50. 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

51. 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

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

53. 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

54. 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

55. Results
NOVEMBER 2013
WTD-ICMC-USP 55

56. 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

57. 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

58. 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

59. 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

60. 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

61. Scenario
NOVEMBER 2013
WTD-ICMC-USP 61

62. 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

63. Simulation Scenario
NOVEMBER 2013
WTD-ICMC-USP 63

64. 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

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

66. 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

67. Joining the Revolution
Join a work that has just started
Hybrid QoS Internet Model
IEEE 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

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