Cross layer optimization

cross layer optimization in manet ppt and advantages of layered architecture in computer networks
Dr.SamuelHunt Profile Pic
Dr.SamuelHunt,United Arab Emirates,Teacher
Published Date:21-07-2017
Your Website URL(Optional)
CROSS LAYER OPTIMIZATION FOR PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE ADHOC NETWORKS A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY by ANITA YADAV (Enrollment no. Ph. D./ 08/CSE/640) Under the Supervision of Prof. Yatindra Nath Singh Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur Prof. Raghuraj Singh Harcourt Butler Technological Institute, Kanpur to the FACULTY OF COMPUTER SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING DR. A. P. J. ABDUL KALAM TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY LUCKNOW – 226021 (INDIA) (FORMERLY UTTAR PRADESH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY, LUCKNOW) January, 2016 CERTIFICATE Certified that ANITA YADAV (enrollment no. Ph. D./08/CSE/640) has carried out the research work presented in this thesis entitled “CROSS LAYER OPTIMIZATION FOR PROTOCOLS IN MOBILE ADHOC NETWORKS” for the award of Doctor of Philosophy from Dr. A. P. J. Abdul Kalam Technical University, Lucknow (formerly Uttar Pradesh Technical University, Lucknow) under our supervision. The thesis embodies results of original work and studies are carried out by the student herself and the content of the thesis do not form the basis for the award of any other degree to the candidate or to anybody else from this or any other University/Institution. (Dr. Raghuraj Singh) (Dr. Yatindra Nath Singh) Professor, Professor, Harcourt Butler Technological Institute, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur Kanpur Place: Date: ii ABSTRACT Advances in wireless technology and hand-held computing devices have brought revolution in the area of mobile communication. The increasing mobility of humans across the globe generated demand for infrastructure-less and quickly deployable mobile networks. Such networks are referred to as Mobile Adhoc Networks (MANET). Usually, nodes in a MANET also act as a router while being is free to roam while communicating each others. Adhoc networks are suited for use in situations where infrastructure is unavailable or to deploy one is not cost effective. Frequent changes in network topology due to mobility and limited battery power of the mobile devices are the key challenges in the adhoc networks. The depletion of power source may cause early unavailability of nodes and thus links in the network. The mobility of nodes will also causes frequent routes breaks and adversely affects the required performance for the applications. Availability of a route in future mainly depends on the availability of links between the nodes forming the route. Therefore, it is important to predict the future availability of a link that is currently available. We have proposed an analytical model for link prediction using Newton divided difference method. This link availability algorithm is incorporated in AODV routing algorithm (AODVLP) to evaluate the performance of AODV routing protocol using the metrics viz. delivery rate, average end-to-end delay, average RTS collisions per node and route failure. In the existing AODV protocol, packets are routed until a link in the existing path fails. This results in degradation of quality of service of network in terms of end-to-end delay and delivery ratio. In this thesis, we have modified AODV routing protocol by incorporating link prediction algorithm using proposed link prediction model. This algorithm predicts the link availability time and even before the link breaks; either it repairs the route locally or send information to iii the source nodes to enable them initiating a new route search well in time. This algorithm improves the quality of service of the network. Simulation results show that AODV routing algorithm with link availability model performs better than the existing AODV. In adhoc networks, MAC protocols are responsible for the coordinated access from the active nodes. Various MAC protocols with different objectives have been proposed for adhoc networks. Maximizing the nodes’ lifetime and thus the network lifetime is a common objective of adhoc networks. Since the adhoc nodes are assumed to be dead when they are out of battery, it is imperative to optimize the battery consumption at the nodes. Another main objective is increase the capacity of the networks. We have proposed dynamic power control wireless adhoc MAC protocol (DPCP) based on modification to RTS- CTS-DATA-ACK handshake in context to IEEE 802.11 and have shown that the proposed scheme saves energy and increases throughput as compared to IEEE 802.11b std. Several researches have proposed cross layer interactions at various layers with different objectives. However, we have proposed a cross layer design for power control and link availability (DPCPLP) in mobile adhoc networks to address both the issues of availability of links due to mobility and of increase of the battery life of the nodes. This method uses interaction of non adjacent layers e.g. physical and network layers for prediction of links break and optimization of power at MAC layer. The received signal strength and transmit power of the packets are used as cross layer interaction parameters. The proposed method performs better than IEEE 802.11 and AODVLP in terms of increased throughput, better packet delivery ratio and decreased average communication interruption time, less routing overheads, less end- to-end delay and lower energy consumption. The performance evaluation of proposed protocols is conducted using ns-2 network simulator. All the simulation results show that the proposed protocols perform better than the other protocols. iv Dedicated To My Maa & Papa v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I owe my profound gratitude to my thesis supervisor Dr. Yatindra Nath Singh, Professor, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur for his valuable guidance, supervision and persistent encouragement. Due to the approach adopted by him in handling my thesis and the way he gave me freedom to think about different things, I was able to do constructive thesis. By working under him I have gained priceless knowledge as to how to go about doing an effective research. I would also like to express my sincere thanks to Dr. Raghuraj Singh, Professor, Computer Science and Engineering Department, Harcourt Butler Technological Institute, Kanpur for his exceptional guidance, ideas and continuous support during the research work. It is extremely hard to find words that express my gratitude to my parents, husband Sharad Kumar Yadav, IOFS and most loving sons Amod Yadav and Aryan Yadav for their invaluable help over all these years. I wish them all good luck in their bright carrier and future plans. They gave me courage and strength whenever I needed it and supported me in every possible way throughout these years. I take this opportunity to thank all the associated faculty members and friends for the precious time they devoted for help, feedback and encouragement during the course of my research work. Finally, I express my gratitude towards The Almighty God for showering His blessings upon me. Anita Yadav vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page no. Certificate ii Abstract iii-iv Acknowledgements vi Tables of Contents vii-ix List of Tables x List of Figures xi-xii List of Abbreviations xiii-xiv CHAPTER 1 : Introduction 1-24 1.1 Mobile Adhoc Networks 1 1.2 Important Issues 3 1.3 MAC Protocols 5 1.4 Routing Protocols 11 1.4.1 Routing Protocol Strategies 11 Proactive strategy 12 Reactive strategy 12 Hybrid strategy 12 1.4.2 Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) Routing 13 1.4.3 Adhoc On Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing 14 1.4.4 Dynamic Source Routing (DSR) 16 1.4.5 Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) 17 1.5 Cross Layer Design 19 1.6 Motivation for the Thesis 21 1.7 Problem Definition 22 1.8 Objectives 22 1.9 Contributions of the Thesis 23 1.10 Organization of the Thesis 23 vii CHAPTER 2 : Wireless MAC, Routing and Cross layer 25-53 Protocols 2.1 Wireless MAC Protocols 25 2.1.1 IEEE 802.11b Standard 25 2.1.2 RTS-CTS-DATA-ACK four way handshake Protocol 27 2.3.3 Minimum Transmit Power Control Protocols 30 2.2 Quality of Service Routing 34 2.2.1 Quality of service in Adhoc Networks 36 Special Issues and Difficulties in MANETS 36 Hard state versus soft state resource reservation 37 Stateful versus Stateless approach 38 Hard QoS versus Soft QoS approach 38 2.2.2 Classification of QoS Approaches 38 2.2.3 QoS Models 39 IntServ 40 DiffServ 41 IntServ over DiffServ 43 FQMM 43 2.2.4 Related Work 44 2.3 Cross Layer Design 47 2.3.1 Layered vs Cross Layered approach 47 2.3.2 Motivations for cross layer design 48 2.3.3 Cross Layer Protocols 51 CHAPTER 3 : Link Availability Model 54-74 3.1 Link Prediction 55 3.1.1 Link Prediction Algorithm 58 3.2 Simulation and Results 60 3.2.1 Simulation Parameters 60 3.2.2 Performance Metrics 61 3.2.3 Simulation Results and Analysis 62 CBR Simulations 62 Energy Simulations 67 viii TCP Simulations 70 3.3 Summary and Future Work 74 CHAPTER 4 : Dynamic Power Control wireless adhoc 75-87 MAC Protocol 4.1 Dynamic Power Control wireless adhoc MAC Protocol 77 4.2.1 Proposed Protocol Basics 77 4.2.2 Model Description 78 4.2.3 Proposed Protocol Description 80 4.2.4 Proposed Protocol Algorithm 80 4.2 Simulation and Results 82 4.2.1 Simulation Parameters 82 4.2.2 Performance Metrics 83 4.2.3 Results and Analysis 84 4.3 Summary and Future work 87 CHAPTER 5 : Cross Layer Design for Power Control and 88-110 Link Availability 5.1 Cross Layer Power Control and Link Availability Prediction 90 5.1.1 Power Control 92 5.1.2 Link Availability 95 5.1.3 Proposed Protocol Algorithm 97 5.2 Simulation and Results 100 5.2.1 Simulation Parameters 100 5.2.2 Performance Metrics 101 5.2.3 Simulation Results and Analysis 102 5.3 Summary and Future Work 110 CHAPTER 6 : Conclusion and Future Work 112-116 6.1 Contributions 114 6.2 Conclusions 115 6.3 Future Work 116 Bibliography 117-124 ix LIST OF TABLES Table 3.1 Simulation parameters for AODVLP 61 Table 4.1 Simulation parameters for DPCP 83 Table 5.1 Simulation parameters for DPCPLP 100 x LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1.1 Hidden and exposed terminal problem 6 Figure 1.2 Classification of MAC Protocols 7 Figure 1.3 Categorization of Adhoc Routing Protocols 13 Figure 2.1 RTS-CTS-DATA-ACK four way handshake MAC Protocol 28 Figure 2.2 Classification of QoS approaches 39 Figure 2.3: The layered and the cross layer architecture 48 Figure 3.1 Local route repair 60 Figure 3.2 Route failures vs nodes 63 Figure 3.3 Packet delivery ratio vs nodes 64 Figure 3.4 Average RTS collisions per node vs nodes 64 Figure 3.5 End-to-end delay vs nodes 65 Figure 3.6 Route failures vs node velocity 65 Figure 3.7 Packet delivery ratio vs node velocity 66 Figure 3.8 Average RTS collisions per node vs node velocity 66 Figure 3.9 End-to-end delay vs node velocity 67 Figure 3.10 Successfully data transmission rate vs traffic generated rate 68 Figure 3.11 Average energy consumption (in Joules) per communication of 69 1Kbyte of data vs traffic generated rate Figure 3.12 Throughput per node vs nodes 69 Figure 3.13 Energy consumption per communication of 1 kilobyte data vs nodes 70 Figure 3.14 Packet delivery ratio vs nodes 71 Figure 3.15 End-to-end delay vs nodes 72 Figure 3.16 Packet delivery ratio vs node velocity 73 Figure 3.17 End-to-end delay vs node velocity 73 Figure 4.1 Successfully data transmitted vs traffic generated rate 84 Figure 4.2 Average energy consumption (in Joule) per communication of 85 1kilobyte of data vs traffic generated rate Figure 4.3 Successfully 1 kilobyte of data transmitted vs density 86 Figure 4.4 Average energy consumption (in Joule) per communication of 86 1kilobyte of data vs density Figure 5.1 Cross layer interactions at node 91 xi Figure 5.2 Format of Optimum Power Table 94 Figure 5.3 Average interruption time vs node velocity 102 Figure 5.4 Routing overhead vs node velocity 103 Figure 5.5 Average interruption time vs packet generation rate 104 Figure 5.6 Routing overhead vs packet generation rate 104 Figure 5.7 Throughput vs packet generation rate 106 Figure 5.8 Average energy consumption (in Joule) per communication of 106 1Kbyte of data vs packet generation rate Figure 5.9 Throughput per node vs no. of nodes 107 Figure 5.10 Energy consumption per communication of 1 kilobyte data vs no. of 108 nodes Figure 5.11 Delivery of packets vs no. of nodes 109 Figure 5.12 End-to-end delay vs no. of nodes 109 xii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS MANET Mobile Adhoc Network AODV Adhoc On-demand Distance Vector Routing AQR Asynchronous Quality of Service Routing BR Bandwidth Routing Protocol CBR Constant Bit Rate CEDAR Core Extraction Distributed Adhoc Routing DSDV Destination Sequenced Distance Vector Routing DSR Dynamic Source Routing GPS Global Positioning System MAC Medium Access Control OLMQR On-demand Link-state Multipath QoS Routing OQR On-demand Quality of Service Routing PLBQR Predictive Location-Based QoS Routing PRTMAC Proactive Real-Time MAC SWAN Stateless Wireless Adhoc Network TBP Ticket Based QoS Routing TCP Transmission Control Protocol PCM Power Control Medium Access Control DPCP Dynamic Power Control Protocol AODVLP Adhoc On-demand Distance Vector Routing with Link Prediction DPCPLP Dynamic Power Control Protocol with Link Prediction IFS Inter Frame Space SIFS Shorter Inter Frame Space xiii DIFS Differentiated Inter Frame Space EIFS Enhanced Inter Frame Space NAV Network Allocation Vector CW Contention Window RTS Request To Send CTS Clear To Send ACK Acknowledgement xiv CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1.1 Mobile Adhoc Networks Historically, Mobile Adhoc Networks (MANETs) have been primarily used in tactical network-related applications to improve battlefield communications. Early adhoc network can be traced back to DARPA Packet Radio Network Project (PRNET) in 1970s. The PRNET project used ALOHA 1 and subsequently used CSMA approaches to support the dynamic sharing of the radio resources, and featured multi-hop communication among nodes by introducing several distance vector routing protocols. In the early 1990, the U.S. Department of Defense continued to support research programs such as Global Mobile Information Systems (GLOMO) and the Near-Term Digital Radio program (NTDR). The recent advances in miniaturization, and the proposal of open standards (Bluetooth, IEEE 802.11, RFID) for wireless communication, have greatly facilitated the deployment of adhoc networks and support for more advanced functions. This allows a node to act as a wireless terminal as well as a repeater and still be compact enough to be mobile. A self organizing adaptive collection of such devices connected with wireless links is said to be an Adhoc network. A wireless network is normally a decentralized network. The network is adhoc because each node is willing to forward data for other nodes, and so the determination of which nodes forward data is made dynamically. This is in contrast to 1 wired networks in which routers perform the task of routing. It is also in contrast to managed (infrastructure) wireless networks, in which a special node known as an Access point manages communication among other nodes. Since the adhoc network is a decentralized network it should detect any new nodes automatically and induct them seamlessly. Conversely, if any node moves out of the network, the remaining nodes should automatically reconfigure themselves to adjust to the new scenario. If nodes are mobile, the network is termed as a MANET (Mobile Adhoc NETwork). The Internet Engineering Task force (IETF) has setup a working group named MANET for developing standards for these networks. Typically there are two types of architectures in adhoc networks: flat and hierarchical 2, 3. Each node in an adhoc network is equipped with a transceiver, an antenna and a power source. The characteristics of these nodes can vary widely in terms of size, processing ability, transmission range and battery power. Some nodes can act as servers, others as clients and few others may be flexible enough to act as both depending on the situation. In certain cases, each node may need to act as router in order to convey information from one node to another 4. The decentralized nature of the Adhoc wireless networks makes them suitable for variety of applications where the central nodes cannot be relied upon. It also improves the scalability of wireless Adhoc networks as compared to wireless managed networks. Also Adhoc networks have the ability to easily integrate with the existing infrastructure oriented network thereby increasing the scope of their applications 3, 5. Some of the applications are given as follows: a) When a disaster occurs, it is possible that existing communication infrastructure might fail completely and restoring communication quickly is crucial. In such situation, an adhoc wireless network featuring wideband capabilities can be used to 2 provide crisis management services. By using a mobile adhoc network, a communication infrastructure could be setup in hours instead of weeks. b) Wireless adhoc networks have applications in vehicular technology and are called Vehicular Adhoc Wireless networks. In these networks, vehicles communicate with each other and possibly with roadside infrastructure. A long list of applications varying from transit safety to driver assistance and internet access can be provided to users through these. c) In battlefields, there is no possibility of having infrastructure oriented network. An adhoc network can be easily deployed in such areas and help in proper coordination amongst the soldiers. d) Adhoc network can be used during travel for household applications, in telemedicine, for virtual navigation, etc. 1.2 Important Issues There are several important issues in adhoc wireless networks. Most adhoc wireless network applications use industrial, scientific and Medical (ISM) band that is free from licensing formalities. Since wireless is a tightly controlled medium, it has limited channel bandwidth that is typically much less than that of wired networks. Besides, the wireless medium is inherently error prone. Even though a radio may have sufficient channel bandwidth, factors such as multiple-access, signal fading, noise and interference can cause significant throughput loss in the wireless networks. Since wireless nodes may be mobile, the network topology can change frequently without any predictable pattern. Usually the links between nodes are bi-directional, but there may be cases when differences in transmission power give rise to unidirectional links, which necessitate special treatment of 3 the medium Access control (MAC) protocols. Adhoc network nodes must conserve energy as they mostly rely on batteries as their power source. The security issues should be considered in the overall network design, as it is relatively easy to eavesdrop on wireless transmission. Routing protocols require information about the current topology, so that a route from a source to destination may always be found, if possilble. However, the existing routing schemes, such as distance vector and link state based protocols, lead to poor route convergence and low throughput for the dynamic topologies. Therefore a new set of routing schemes such as Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) 6, Dynamic source routing (DSR) 7, Adhoc On-Demand Distance Vector routing (AODV) 8 and Temporally Ordered Routing Algorithm (TORA) 9 have been developed. MAC layer is also referred as a sub layer Dofa ta the Link ‘ layer”. It involves functions and procedures necessary to transfer data between two or more nodes in a network. It is the responsibility of the MAC layer to perform error detection for the anomalies occurring in the physical layer. The layer performs specific activities for framing, physical addressing, flow control and error control. It is responsible for resolving conflicts among different nodes for channel access. Since the MAC layer has a direct bearing on how reliably and efficiently data can be transmitted between two nodes along the routing path in the network, it affects the Quality of Service (QoS) in the network. The design of MAC protocol should also address issues caused by mobility of nodes and unreliable time varying channels. 4 1.3 MAC Protocols The MAC protocols developed for wired networks like Carrier Sense Multiple Access and its variations such as CSMA with Collision Detection (CSMA/CD) cannot be directly used in wireless networks. In CSMA based schemes, the transmitting node first senses the medium to check whether it is idle or busy. The node defers its own transmission to prevent a collision with the existing signal, if the medium is sensed busy. Otherwise, the node begins to transmit its data while continuing to sense the medium. But in the wireless networks, the collisions occur at the receiving node. Since, signal strength in the wireless medium fades away in the proportion to the square of the distance from the transmitter, the presence of the signal at the receiver node may not be clearly detected at the other sending terminals, if they are out of range. As shown in the figure 1.1, node B is within the range of nodes A and C, but C is not in the range of A. Let us consider the case where A is transmitting to node B. Node C, being out of A’s range, cannot detect carrier and may send data to B, thus causing a collision at B. This is referred to as the ‘hidden terminal problem’, as nodes A and C are hidden from each other 10, 11. Let us consider another problem which we face in wireless networks. In this case, node B is transmitting to node A. Since C is within B’s range, it senses carrier and decides to defer its own transmission. However this is unnecessary because there is no way C’s transmission can cause any collision at receiver A. This is referred as the ‘exposed terminal problem’, since B being exposed to C caused the later to needlessly defer its transmission 11. 5 Figure 1.1: Hidden and exposed terminal problem Apart from above mentioned problems, adhoc wireless networks have another limitation of having limited energy or battery life. This problem is quite severe because once the battery of the node is exhausted; it cannot transmit as well as receive any data. It becomes dead and this affects the network connectivity since in the adhoc network when an intermediate node dies off, the whole link has to be formed again. This leads to large amount of delay thereby hampering the throughput of the whole system. Hence the power control is a very important aspect in Wireless Adhoc network. There are various types of MAC protocols developed for wireless adhoc networks; they are classified as shown in the figure 1.2. In contention free MAC schemes (e.g. TDMA, FDMA, CDMA), certain assignments are used to avoid contentions 3. Contention based schemes on the other hand, are aware of the risk of collisions of transmitted data. Since contention free MAC schemes are more applicable to networks with centralized control, we shall focus on contention based MAC schemes in this thesis. 6