Professional Documents
Culture Documents
11 Based
Dual MAC for MANETs
Dissertation
by
Satyajit Rai
Roll No: 01329009
and
Dedi
ated to
my mother
Smt. Manorama Rai
and
my father
Shri Harish
handra Rai
By
Satyajit Rai
(01329009)
of Te hnology.
Internal Examiner
External Examiner
Chairperson
Date :
Abstra
t
Multihop ad-ho
wireless networks oer great
hallenges for proto
ol designers. Stations
in su
h networks are
onstrained by fa
tors like low power, limited bandwidth, link
errors, and
ollisions. Changes are needed at various levels of the proto
ol sta
k, most
importantly at the medium a
ess layer (MAC). The medium a
ess me
hanism in
multihop wireless networks should minimize
ollisions, and take
are of the hidden and
exposed node problems. The IEEE 802.11 MAC with Distributed Coordination Fun
tion
(DCF) does not s
ale well in su
h networks. We introdu
e Point Coordination Fun
tion
(PCF) in the region of high tra
areas, and dis
uss its ee
t on network performan
e.
To improve network s
alability and throughput, we propose the design of a new MAC
alled Dual MAC. This work dis
usses ar
hite
ture and working of the dual MAC in
detail. Performan
e results of the network using dual MAC are presented, and
ompared
with that of pure DCF operation.
iii
A
knowledgments
I express my sin
ere gratitude towards my guides Prof. Sridhar Iyer and Dr. Leena
Chandran Wadia for their
onstant help, en
ouragement and inspiration throughout
the proje
t work. Without their invaluable guidan
e, this work would never have been
a su
essful one. I would also like to thank the members of the Mobile Computing
Resear
h Group at KReSIT, namely Srinath Perur, Vijay Rajsinghania, Vikram Jamwal,
Deepanshu Shukla, Anupam Goyal, and Abhishek Goliya for their valuable suggestions
and helpful dis
ussions. Last, but not the least, I would like to thank the whole KReSIT
family whi
h made my stay at IIT Bombay a memorable one.
Satyajit Rai
IIT Bombay
January 15, 2003
iv
Contents
Abstra t
iii
A knowledgments
iv
List of Figures
1
vii
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1
2
2
2
3
3
4
4
5
5
6
6
7
7
7
8
8
9
10
11
12
Dual MAC
15
12
13
14
15
15
16
16
17
18
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
Simulation Setup . . . . . .
Simple S
enario and Results
Generi
S
enario and Result
Dis
ussion on Results . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
19
20
22
22
22
24
27
28
Bibliography
30
vi
28
28
29
List of Figures
1.1 Multihop
ooperative Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2 Hidden and Exposed Node S
enario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
3
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
6
7
9
9
10
11
12
13
14
16
17
18
19
20
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
23
23
24
25
25
26
26
Simple S
enario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Throughput
omparision of Dual MAC Vs DCF MAC in simple s
enario
Pa
ket Delivery Ratio for Dual MAC Vs DCF MAC in simple s
enario .
Dual MAC Vs DCF MAC at 10 pa
kets/se
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dual MAC Vs DCF MAC at 20 pa
kets/se
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dual MAC Vs DCF MAC at 30 pa
kets/se
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dual MAC Vs DCF MAC - overall Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Chapter 1
Introdu
tion: Cooperative
Ad-Ho
Networks
IP and Routing
The stations in wireless network do not remain in the same subnet due to mobility;
hen
e either their IP address needs to be
hanged and/or the pa
kets be forwarded to
them. These requirements have lead to development of mobile IP[1 where the addresses
are assigned to mobile hosts dynami
ally and the pa
kets are appropriately forwarded
to them. Frequent link
hanges in ad-ho
networks
ause
hange of routes between
stations. This requires that the routing proto
ol take
are of these
hanges and update
the routes frequently. Spe
ial routing proto
ols like AODV[2, DSR[3 and DSDV[4
have been proposed for use in wireless ad-ho
networks. We will not dis
uss more about
the IP and routing in this thesis.
MAC
The link
hara
teristi
s in wireless environments is very dierent from that of wired
networks. At link layer we have to fa
e following
hallenges:
Bandwidth is the one of the most s
ar
e resour
e in wireless networks.
The available bandwidth in wireless networks (2-10Mbps) is far less than the wired
links (typi
ally 100Mbps).
Bandwidth:
Range Issues:
The wireless stations are battery operated and therefore higher transmission
power leads to faster degeneration of the batteries. On the other hand, if we keep
transmission power too small, the stations may no longer be in range of ea
h other.
Power:
Sin
e all stations
an not listen to ea
h other, transmission from two station
may lead to
ollision at another station.
Collisions:
Channel fading and interferen
e
ause link errors and these errors may
sometimes be very severe.
Link Errors:
1.4.3
A Tx Range
Tx Range
Tx Range
Tx Range
A simple and elegant solution to the hidden node problem is to use small pa
kets
alled RTS (Request to Send) and CTS (Clear to Send) for handshaking before transmission of data pa
ket. This solution was proposed by Karn [7 in his MACA proto
ol
for AX.25.
Chapter 2
MAC in Multi-hop Ad-Ho
Networks
TDMA
Time Division Multiple A
ess (TDMA) is one of the simplest
hannel a
ess me
hanisms. In this method ea
h station sends the data for a nite duration
alled time slot.
Typi
ally, ea
h time slot has xed duration. In TDMA s
heme, there should be a way
to gure out the time slot for the transmission. This is done by having a station
alled
Base Station whi
h is responsible for assigning the time slots to the stations. A set
of time slots forms a TDMA
y
le or frame whi
h repeats at a regular duration. At
the beginning of the time slot, the Base Station sends the allo
ation slots for the rest
of the TDMA
y
le and the stations send the Data in their
orresponding time slots.
Typi
ally, the stations transmit on one frequen
y
alled uplink frequen
y and re
eive on
another frequen
y
alled downlink frequen
y.
TDMA suits very well for telephone appli
ation be
ause of very predi
table tra
requirement and is used in
ellular telephone networks. However, it does not suite the
pa
ket based appli
ations where the data tra
is bursty and unpredi
table. This is
be
ause TDMA is very stri
t and in
exible.
2.1.2
CSMA/CA
CSMA/CA (Carrier Sense Multiple A
ess) is derived from CSMA/CD (Collision Dete
tion) whi
h is the
hannel a
ess me
hanism used in wired Ethernets. Sin
e the
transmission range of wireless stations is limited,
ollision
an not be dete
ted dire
tly.
This proto
ols tries to avoid the
ollision. On arrival of a data pa
ket from LLC, a
station senses the
hannel before transmission and if found idle, starts transmission. If
another transmission is going on, the station waits for the length of
urrent transmission,
and starts
ontention (i.e. waits for a random amount of time). Sin
e the
ontention is
a random time, ea
h station get statisti
ally equal
han
e to win the
ontention.
Polling MAC
Polling me
hanism in wireless networks is a mix of TDMA and CSMA/CA a
ess methods. The base station has total
ontrol over medium, but the frame size
an be variable.
The base station polls the stations in the network, and the stations reply with the data,
if available. The base station
an poll all the stations one by one or follow some intelligent reservation strategy to poll only those stations whi
h have data to send. Polling
is very mu
h like TDMA, ex
ept that it is more
exible and allows variable length data
pa
kets.
TDMA and Polling methods have disadvantage of being
entralized in nature, and
therefore, are not suitable for multihop ad ho
networks. This is due to the fa
t that
all the stations are not in transmission range of ea
h other. CSMA/CA is distributed
in nature, and hen
e, is suitable for multihop ad-ho
networks. However, it must be
noted that a distributed medium a
ess me
hanism like CSMA/CD suers from the
disadvantage of
ausing
ollision under high load
ondition, i.e., if too many stations try
to a
ess the medium at the same time,
han
es of
ollision in
rease. One way to avoid
6
The IEEE 802.11 MAC was designed by a
ommittee of IEEE. The goal of the
ommittee
was to
reate a MAC standard for wireless LANs. In the 802.11
ommittee, ea
h vendor
has pushed its own te
hnology and spe
i
ations. The result is that the standard is
very versatile and well designed in
luding all the optimizations and
lever te
hniques
developed by dierent vendors. The standard spe
ies one MAC proto
ol and three
physi
al standards: Frequen
y Hopping 1Mb/s (Only), Dire
t Sequen
e 1 and 2 Mb/s
and diuse infrared. Subsequently, the standard has been extended to support 2 Mb/s
for Frequen
y Hopping and 5.5 and 11 Mb/s for Dire
t Sequen
e (802.11b). The MAC
has two main modes of operation, a distributed mode (CSMA/CA), and a
oordinated
mode. 802.11 also uses MAC level retransmissions, RTS/CTS and fragmentation. The
standard also has optional power management features and optional authenti
ation and
en
ryption (using the WEP, Wired Equivalent Priva
y). Now the standard has also
been extended to be used in 5GHz band (IEEE 802.11a) and some extensions have been
added in 2.4GHz band (IEEE 802.11b) to in
rease the bandwidth.
2.2.2
HiperLan-I
The HiperLan standard has been developed by resear
hers at ETSI (European Tele
ommuni
ations Standards Institute). It is developed without any strong vendor in
uen
e
and is quite dierent from existing produ
ts. The standard is quite simple, and uses
some advan
ed features. It works in dedi
ated bandwidth (5.1GHz to 5.3GHz) and so
does not have to use spread spe
trum. The signalling rate is 23.5Mb/s, and 5 xed
hannels are dened. The proto
ol uses a variant of CSMA/CA based on pa
ket time
to live and priority, and MAC level retransmissions. The proto
ol in
ludes optional
en
ryption (no algorithm mandated) and power saving.
The ni
est feature of HiperLan (apart from the high speed) is the ad-ho
routing: if
your destination is out of rea
h, intermediate nodes will automati
ally forward it through
the optimal route within the HiperLan network (the routes are regularly automati
ally
7
HiperLan-II
HiperLan II was the rst standard to be based on OFDM modulation. Ea
h sub-
arrier
may be modulated by dierent modulations (and use dierent
onvolutional
ode, a
sort of Forward Error Corre
tion, FEC), whi
h allow to oer multiple bit-rates (6, 9, 12,
18, 27 and 36 Mb/s, with optional 54 Mb/s), with likely performan
e around 25 Mb/s
bit-rate. The
hannel width is 20 MHz in 5MHz band, and in
ludes 48 OFDM
arriers
used to
arry data and 4 additional are used as referen
es (pilot
arriers - total is 52
arriers, 312.5 kHz spa
ing).
HiperLan II is a Wireless ATM system, and the MAC proto
ol is a TDMA s
heme
entrally
oordinated with reservation slots. Ea
h slot has a 54 B payload, and the MAC
provide SAR (segmentation and reassembly - fragment large pa
kets into 54 B
ells)
and ARQ (Automati
Request - MAC retransmissions). The s
heduler (in the
entral
oordinator) is
exible and adaptive, with a
all admission
ontrol, and the
ontent of
the TDMA frame
hange on a frame basis to a
ommodate tra
needs. HiperLan II
also denes power saving and se
urity features. HiperLan II is designed to
arry ATM
ells, but also IP pa
kets, Firewire pa
kets (IEEE 1394) and digital voi
e (from
ellular
phones). The main advantage of HiperLan II is that it
an oer better quality of servi
e
(low laten
y) and dierentiated quality of servi
e (guarantee of bandwidth).
The IEEE 802.11 standard is the most widespread standard and has been deployed
in wireless LANs. It is also being used in ad-ho
network testbeds, and lot of resear
h is
going on adapting 802.11 for ad-ho
networks. Besides that, it oers both infrastru
ture
mode and infrastru
ture-less mode of operation and both
an
oexist together without
any modi
ations. These fa
tors make 802.11 MAC very suitable for ad-ho
networks
and this thesis dis
usses the ad-ho
networks using 802.11 MAC.
2.3.1
DCF Operation
The DCF is the fundamental a
ess method used to support asyn
hronous data transfer
on a best eort basis. The DCF is based on CSMA/CA. The
arrier sense is performed at
both the air interfa
e, referred to as physi
al
arrier sensing, and at the MAC sublayer,
referred to as virtual
arrier sensing. Physi
al
arrier sensing dete
ts presen
e of other
users by analyzing the a
tivity in the
hannel through the re
eived signal strength.
A station performs virtual
arrier sense by examining the re
eived MPDU (MAC
Proto
ol Data Unit) information in the header of RTS, CTS and ACK frames. The
stations in BSS use this information to adjust their Network Allo
ation Ve
tor (NAV),
whi
h indi
ates amount of time that must elapse until the
urrent transmission is
omplete and the
hannel
an be sampled again for idle status.
SIFS
DIFS
RTS
Source
Destination
Data
SIFS
SIFS
ACK
CTS
DIFS
Other
NAV (RTS)
CW
NAV (CTS)
NAV (Data)
Defer Access
Backoff Started
to a
ess
ommuni
ation medium. For basi
a
ess method (without RTS/CTS), the
station waits for DIFS period and samples the
hannel again. If the
hannel is still idle
the station transmits MPDU. If the re
eiving station re
eives the pa
ket
orre
tly, it
sends an ACK after waiting for the SIFS time. If RTS/CTS is used then the station
sends a RTS pa
ket before sending MPDU. On re
eiving RTS, the re
eiving station
sends a CTS frame after SIFS time. On re
eiving CTS, the sender waits for SIFS time
and transmits the MPDU. Again, the ACK follows after SIFS period. It is also possible
to send the multiple fragments of a MPDU, where ACK to ea
h fragment is sent after
SIFS time, and next fragment is sent after SIFS time of ACK.
The
ollision avoidan
e portion of CSMA/CA is performed through a random ba
ko
pro
edure. If a station initially senses the
hannel busy; then the station waits until
the
hannel be
omes idle for DIFS period, and then
omputes a random ba
ko time
within a range
alled ba
ko window. For IEEE 802.11, time is slotted in time periods
that
orresponds to a Slot Time. After ea
h unsu
essful attempt, the ba
ko window
is in
reased exponentially until a maximum value. The idle period after the DIFS period
is
alled
ontention window (CW). The advantage of this
hannel a
ess method is that
it promotes fairness among stations, but its weakness is that it
an not provide delay
bound servi
e to the stations.
2.3.2
PCF Operation
The 802.11 MAC oers
ontention free servi
e by means of PCF. PCF is optional
apability and provides
ontention-free (CF) frame transfers. The PCF relies on the point
oordinator (PC) to poll other stations. The polled stations
an send the data without
ontending for the medium. In a wireless LAN, the fun
tion of a PC is performed by
AP within ea
h BSS.
CFP Repitition Interval
CFP
CP
PCF
DCF
NAV
CFP
CP
PCF
DCF
NAV
and timing. The limits on durations of ea
h of the frames are des
ribed in the IEEE
802.11 standard [5. In the CP, the stations use DCF to a
ess the medium.
Summary
The DCF is suitable for the ad-ho
ontention based servi
e, whereas the PCF oers
polling based servi
e. The DCF
an exist independently in a network, but the PCF
oexists with the DCF. The DCF
an be easily deployed in ad-ho
networks, as it does
not require any infrastru
ture (like AP in
ase of PCF). The PCF
an provide
onne
tion
oriented servi
e but is suitable largely for the one-hop wireless LAN setup. However,
simply using PCF in
entral part of the multihop network is not enough as the stations
in the PCF mode do not use RTS/CTS ex
hange during CFP. The la
k of RTS/CTS
ex
hange results in hidden and exposed node problems. We dis
uss this s
enario in
greater detail in next
hapter, and propose the solution to the problems en
ountered by
simple DCF/PCF operation of IEEE 802.11 MAC in multihop networks.
11
Chapter 3
IEEE 802.11 MAC in Multi-hop
S
enario
t
t
t
t
Tx Range
t
t
t
t
Central Station
Inner Stations
Boundary Stations
t Outer Stations
.....
.... ....
.......
....
.........
Central station
Inner stations
Boundary stations
Outer stations
..........
..... ...
..........
........
..... .....
...........
........
..... ....
..........
..
..
..
...
..
...
..
..
.
....
..
...
...
..
..
...
...
..
..
..
..
...
..
....
...
...
.
.....
.
.....
..........
.... ...
.........
.....
.
u
u
u
...
..
....
..
.....
.
....
..
...
..
.....
.
......
......
......
.......
.......
....... ....
... ........ ........ .......
.
.....
u......
..
....
..........
.
... ....
.........
...
.
..
...
...
..
...
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
..
u
u
....
..
....
..
........
..... ....
..........
...........
.
.... ....
........
.....
.
..
....
.
...
............
..
.... ....
.....
...........
... ..
..........
..
...
..
...
..
..
...........
..
.
... ...
.......
...........
.
.... ....
.......
Central station
u Stations using PCF
.........
.
.... ....
.........
Stations using DCF
13
during the CFP period, and therefore,
an not re
eive from outer stations. It
an
also be said that the boundary nodes be
ome exposed to PC.
Outer stations be
ome hidden to PC, and vi
e versa, as there is no RTS/CTS
ex hange between PC and its one hop neighbours during CFP period.
The Figure 3.3 shows that there is no throughput gain with hybrid mode as
ompared
with pure DCF mode. In fa
t, hybrid mode performs worse than DCF espe
ially under
low load.
Comparision of performance of DCF and PCF
1
dcf 10 pkts/s
dcf 20 pkts/s
dcf 30 pkts/s
pcf 10 pkts/s
pcf 20 pkts/s
pcf 30 pkts/s
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10
15
20
25
30
CBR connections
35
40
45
14
Chapter 4
Dual MAC
the transmission of outer node does not ollide with that of PC, and vi e versa.
The DCF MAC in the dual node an re eive from outer nodes even when the
NAV of PCF MAC is set during CFP period, thereby eliminating exposed node
problem.
15
6
?
Dual MAC
DCF
MAC
PCF
MAC
6
?
6
?
Phy
Phy
6
?
6
?
Wireless Channel
Figure 4.1: Ar
hite
ture of Dual Ma
The dual MAC
onsist of two MACs in a single station ea
h
apable to send and
re
eive pa
kets independently. Ea
h MAC is designed to operate on dierent logi
al
hannels. As mentioned earlier, the
hannels
an be either FDMA or CDMA but it
does not make dieren
e as far as the design of the dual MAC is
on
erned. As shown
in Figure 4.1, the dual MAC is below the Link Layer and basi
ally en
apsulate two
a
tual 802.11 MACs. These two MACs whi
h we refer to as PCF MAC and DCF MAC
respe
tively,
ommuni
ate on two dierent logi
al
hannels. The DCF MAC talks to
the stations that are operating in DCF mode and the PCF MAC talks to the PC and
other stations whi
h are in PCF mode. The dual MAC is a layer on the top of these
MACs and single point of interfa
e to the Link Layer (LL). For all down-going pa
kets
the dual MAC layer a
ts as arbitrator and sends on either of the MAC below it. For
the up-going pa
kets, the job of dual MAC is simply to hand over the pa
ket to the link
layer.
4.4 Operation
A pa
ket arriving from link layer is re
eived by the dual MAC and handed over to the
MAC at appropriate frequen
y. The link layer nds out the MAC address of the next hop
destination by using ARP and hands out the pa
ket to the dual MAC layer along with
the destination MAC address. In
ase dual MAC, the dual MAC also needs to know the
hannel of the destination station. This
ould be done either by ARP table maintaining
information about the
hannel on whi
h the destination stations is
ommuni
ation, or
by maintaining a lo
al list of stations on ea
h
hannel. The dual MAC gures out the
hannel of the destination MAC and sends out the pa
ket to the appropriate MAC. The
broad
ast pa
kets like route dis
overy pa
kets and ARP pa
kets are sent to both the
16
17
Chapter 5
Dual MAC Implementation in NS
uptarget
LL arptable - ARP
downtarget
IFQ
downtarget
uptarget
- MAC
6uptarget
downtarget
?
ma
Radio
Propagation propagation
Model
NetIF
hannel ?
6uptarget
Channel
queue is
onne
ted to the MAC layer (MAC obje
t) through interfa
e downtarget , and
the pa
kets are pulled o by the MAC when required. The link layer also
ontains a
referen
e to MAC through the ma
interfa
e. After the MAC has a
quired the medium,
it sends it to the physi
al layer (NetIF obje
t) through the interfa
e downtarget . The
physi
al layer sends this pa
ket over the
hannel (Channel obje
t) through the
hannel
interfa
e and the pa
ket rea
hes to the physi
al layer of the station at the other end of
the link.
The outgoing pa
ket is handed over by Channel to the physi
al layer through the
uptarget interfa
e. The physi
al layer determines the re
eived power levels through
propagation model (propagation ) and pro
esses the pa
ket. The pa
ket after pro
essing, is handed over to the MAC layer through uptarget interfa
e. The MAC layer
pro
esses the pa
ket and handles over to the link layer through the interfa
e uptarget .
uptarget
LL
downtarget
arptable
ARP
IFQ
downtarget
uptarget
Dual Ma
ma
DCF
MAC
PCF
MAC
downtarget
Radio
Propagation propagation
Model
uptarget
NetIF
hannel ?
6uptarget
Channel
5.3 Implementation in NS
All the up
oming and downgoing pa
kets are rst re
eived by the dual MAC. In
ase
of downgoing pa
kets, the dual MAC determines the
hannel on whi
h this pa
ket is to
be sent, and handles it over to appropriate MAC. In
ase of ingoing pa
kets, it simply
hands over the pa
kets to the MAC
orresponding to re
eived
hannel where it is handed
to link layer after pro
essing.
5.3 Implementation in NS
Dual_Ma
:: re
v(pa
ket)
{
hannel_id =
hannel id in pa
ket header;
if ( re
eived pa
ket is bea
on ) {
p
f_
hannel_id =
hannel_id;
PC = address of sender;
}
if ( dire
tion == DOWN AND pa
ket is broad
ast) {
send pa
ket on DCF MAC;
send pa
ket on PCF MAC;
return;
}
if ( dire
tion == DOWN AND destination == PC ) {
send pa
ket on PCF MAC;
return;
}
if ( dire
tion == UP AND
hannel_id == p
f_
hannel_id ) {
send pa
ket on PCF MAC;
return;
}
5.3 Implementation in NS
header. The undesired pa
kets (pa
kets of dierent
hannel) are ltered by examining
this variable in the re
eived pa
ket header. For the ltering, the
hanges have been
done to Ma
802 11
lass. Ea
h outgoing pa
ket from MAC has its
hannel id variable
set to appropriate
hannel. All interfa
es like uptarget , downtarget , et
. have been
hanged su
h that all the pa
kets that are re
eived either from the Physi
al Layer or
Link Layer are rst re
eived by the dual MAC.
As pointed out in se
tion 4.4, the determination of
hannel for an outgoing pa
ket
an be either done by
hanging ARP module or by using a lo
al list of stations on
ea
h
hannel. Currently the se
ond approa
h is being used. The dual MAC stores the
hannel-id of the PC in a variable as all the tra
for PCF MAC goes only to the
PC. All the pa
kets that are destined for PC are sent on PCF MAC. For in
oming
pa
kets, the
hannel-id is determined from the pa
ket header and pa
ket is handed over
to appropriate MAC. The
orresponding MAC updates its state and after pro
essing
the pa
ket and hands it over to link layer.
21
Chapter 6
Simulation and Results
alisti
onsidering the fa
t the area in whi
h stations are present is limited to
1500mx1000m and inter-node distan
e is of the order of few hundred feet.
22
......
..... ....
.......
.
.....
.....
.....
........
.
.....
.... ....
.....
.
......
.
.
.
.....
.....
.....
.
.
.
....
.
.
.
.
..
.....
.... ..
.....
... ..
.....
..... .......
.....
........
.....
....
.....
.
.
.
.
.
...
...........
........
.
.......
.... ....
..... ...
.....
..
.....
.....
.
.
...
.
.
.....
.
.
.
.
.
..
.....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.....
....
........
.....
..... .....
.
...........
.....
.......
......
.....
..
.....
.
..... ......
.
.
.
.
...
....
.... ....
.
.....
.............
.......
.
.....
.............
.
.
.
.
.
.............
.....
..............
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
............
....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
....
.. ..
..
.............
.........
.............
.............
..
.............
.............
..
.............
.............
............................
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
...................
.
.....
........
........
...........
....
..... .....
.
.
.
.
.... ....
.
..........
............
.......
......
.
...........................
..
.
...................
.
............
.
.............
.
............
.
.............
.............
..
............
..
.............
.............
...............
............
............
.
.............
.....
..
............
..... .....
.............
.......
............
..
............
..
.............
........
............
.
.
.
.
..
... ..
.
.......
.
.
.
.
...... .....
.
........
.........
.
.
... ..
..
......
.
...
..
...
.
....
..........
.
... .....
..........
.
....
.....
.... .....
.
........
12
13
14
.......
.... ....
.......
15
10
18
19
11
...
.
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
...
.
...
.
...
.
..
.
..
.
......... ..
.
.
... ... ..
......
.
..
.
..
..
..
.
.
..
..
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
..
..
.
..
.
........
..
.
.... ....
..
......
..
..
.
...
.
...
.
...
..
..
.
...
.
...
.
..
...
..
..
.
.
.
16
17
140
Throughput (Kbytes/sec)
120
100
80
60
40
dual
dcf
20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
Figure 6.2: Throughput omparision of Dual MAC Vs DCF MAC in simple s enario
23
0.85
0.8
0.75
0.7
0.65
0.6
0.55
0.5
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Figure 6.3: Pa ket Delivery Ratio for Dual MAC Vs DCF MAC in simple s enario
24
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
0.8
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
25
45
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
CBR connections
Throughput (Kbytes)
40000
35000
30000
25000
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
26
160000
lelism in the pa
ket transmissions. This also eliminates the hidden node problem
in the
entralized s
enario.
The dual MAC oers parallelism by allowing the transmissions and re eptions by
DCF MAC even if the NAV of PCF MAC is set during the poll by PC. This
eliminates the exposed node problem at boundary nodes whi
h are exposed to the
PC when the PC polls the stations.
We
an see from the graphs that the throughput performan
e in
rease with dual
MAC is more than twi
e that of DCF, whi
h is remarkable
onsidering that only few
stations have dual MAC.
27
Chapter 7
Con
lusion and Future Work
on
entrated on DCF mode of 802.11. Poojary, Krishnamurthy and Dao [10 have tried
hanging power of
ontrol pa
kets (RTS, CTS and ACK) with stations having power
ontrol
apabilities. They show that it does not in
rease the throughput of the network
due to overheads. Deng and Haas propose dual Busy Tone Multiple A
ess (DBTMA)
[11 for eliminating the exposed and hidden node problems. DBTMA used dierent
hannels for data and
ontrol pa
kets. Nasipuri and Das [12, [13 have proposed MAC
with multiple
hannels, and shown throughput improvement.
The dual MAC has been designed keeping in the mind the number of
hannels
available in 802.11. The most
ommon method of physi
al a
ess in available WLAN
ards is the DS-CDMA. The 802.11 with DS-CDMA allows three dierent
hannels. The
dual MAC
an use any two of them. Another advantage of using dual MAC is that very
few stations need the dual MAC
apability (Boundary Nodes) and rest of the stations
an
ontinue using existing WLAN
ards. However, the dual MAC requires that PCF
and DCF be done at dierent frequen
ies.
29
Bibliography
[1 C. Perkins, Network Working Group, RFC 3220: IP Mobility Support for IPv4,
http://www.ietf.org/rf
/rf
3220.txt.
[2 Charles E. Perkins et. all, Mobile Ad Ho
Networking Working Group,
Ad ho
On-Demand Distan
e Ve
tor (AODV) Routing, http://www.ietf.org/
internet-drafts/draft-ietf-manet-aodv-12.txt.
[3 David B. Johnson, David A. Maltz, Yih-Chun Hu, and Jorjeta G. Jet
heva,
IETF MANET Working Group, The Dynami
Sour
e Routing Proto
ol for
Mobile Ad Ho
Networks (DSR), http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/
draft-ietf-manet-dsr-07.txt.
[4 Charles E. Perkins, Pravin Bhagwat, Highly dynami
Destination-Sequen
ed
Distan
e-Ve
tor routing (DSDV) for mobile
omputers, ACM SIGCOMM Computer
Communi
ation Review, v.24 n.4, p.234-244, O
t. 1994.
[5 IEEE Std. 802.11, Wireless LAN Media A
ess Control (MAC) and Physi
al Layer
(PHY) Spe
i
ations, 1999.
[6 Brian P. Crowe, I. Widjaja, J. Kim, P. Sakai, IEEE 802.11 Wireless Lo
al Area
Networks, IEEE Communi
ations Magazine, September 1997.
[7 Phil Karn, MACA - A New Channel A
ess Method for Pa
ket Radio, ARRL/CRRL
Amature Radio 9th Computer Networking Group paper 801.22/92-39, Mar
h, 1992.
[8 Andreas Kopsel, Jean-Pierre Ebert, and Adam Wolisz, A Performan
e Comparision
of Point and Distributed Coordination Fun
tion of an IEEE 802.11 WLAN in the
presen
e of Real-Time Requirements, Pro
. of 7th Intl. Workshop on Mobile Multimedia Communi
ations (MoMuC2000), O
tober 23-26, 2002.
[9 Shugong Xu, Tarek Saadawi Does IEEE 802.11 MAC Proto
ol Work Well in Multihop Wireless Ad Ho
Networks?, IEEE Communi
ations Magazine, p.130-137, June
2001.
[10 Neeraj Poojary, Srikanth V. Krishnamurthy, and Son Dao, Medium A
ess Control
in a Network of Ad Ho
Mobile Nodes with Heterogeneous Power Capabilities, IEEE
International Conferen
e on Communi
ations (ICC 2001), volume 3, p.872-877, 2001.
[11 J. Deng, and Z. J. Haas, Dual Busy Tone Multiple A
ess (DBTMA): A New
Medium A
ess Control for Pa
ket Radio Networks, IEEE ICUPC'98, Floren
e, Italy,
O
tober 5-9, 1998.
30
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[12 A. Nasipuri, and S. R. Das. A Multi
hannel CSMA proto
ol for multi-hop wireless networks, Pro
. of IEEE Wireless Communi
ations and Networking Conferen
e
(WCNC'99), September 1999.
[13 Asis Nasipuri, and Samir R. Das, Multi
hannel CSMA with Signal Power-Based
Channel Sele
tion for Multihop Wireless Networks, Pro
eedings of the IEEE Fall
Vehi
ular Te
hnology Conferen
e (VTC 2000), September 2000.
[14 The VINT proje
t, NS notes and do
umentation, editors: Kevin Fall and Kannan Varadhan, http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns.
[15 Ad Kamerman and Leo Monteban, WaveLAN-II: A High-Performan
e Wireless
LAN for the Unli
ensed band, 1997.
31