You are on page 1of 33

CBRP: A Cluster-based Routing Protocol

for Mobile Ad hoc Networks

Presented by: Jiang Mingliang Supervised by: Dr Y.C. Tay, Dr Philip Long

Presentation Outline
Project Overview and Objectives Related Works CBRP: Motivations CBRP: the Details Performance Evaluation Conclusion and Future Work

Project Overview
Mobile Ad hoc Networks (MANET), its applications and challenges IETF working group MANET

Project Overview
MANET characteristics ( & the difficulties for routing protocols)
Dynamic Topology Limited Link Bandwidth Limited Power Supply for Mobile Node Need to scale to large networks

Project Objective
Design a routing protocol for MANET that is:
efficient scalable distributed and simple to implement

Evaluate CBRP through simulation


compare with different design alternatives compare against other MANET protocols

Related Works
Existing MANET protocols:
discover routes Source routing on-demand (re-active) Table driven MANET routing protocols Maintain updated routes (pro-active) Variation of distant vector?

DSR

AODV, ABR, TORA


DSDV

OLSR Variations of link state routing?

Related Works
Problems with pro-active routing protocols
high overhead in
periodic/triggered routing table updates

low convergence rate waste in maintaining routes that are not going to be used!! Simulating results have shown RIP, OSPF, DSDV fails to converge in highly dynamic MANET.

Related Works
Re-active Routing Protocols
prohibitive flooding traffic in route discovery route acquisition delay
every route breakage causes a new route discovery

Works in trying to reduce flooding traffic


LAR (GPS for every mobile node?) DSR (aggressive caching)

CBRP: Motivations
Design Objective:
a distributed, efficient, scalable protocol

Major design decisions:


use clustering approach to minimize ondemand route discovery traffic use local repair to reduce route acquisition delay and new route discovery traffic suggest a solution to use uni-directional links

CBRP:

Protocol Overview

Cluster Formation
Objective:
Mechanism:
Form small, stable clusters with only local information

Variations of min-id cluster formation algorithm. Nodes periodically exchange HELLO pkts to
maintain a neighbor table
neighbor status (C_HEAD, C_MEMBER, C_UNDECIDED) link status (uni-directional link, bi-directional link)

maintain a 2-hop-topology link state table


HELLO message format:
Node ID Neighbor ID Node Status Neighbor status Link status

Adjacent cluster ID

Cluster Formation (an example)


Variation of Min-ID
Minimal change Define Undecided State Aggressive Undecided -> Clusterhead

11

e.g. 2s neighbor table


Nbr ID Nbr status Link status 7 6 4 1 member C_head member C_head
Bi-directional Bi-directional Bi-directional Bi-directional

4
3 1

8 10

2
5 6

Adjacent Cluster Discovery


Objective:
For clusterheads 3 hops away to discover each other 11 Mechanism:

e.g. 4s Cluster Adjacency Table


Adj cluster ID Gateway 8 9 6 2

Cluster Adjacency Table exchanged in HELLO message 4


3 1

8 10

2
5 6

Route Discovery
Source S floods all clusterheads with Route Request Packets (RREQ) to discover destination D 11 (D) [3,1,8,11] 9 4 8 [3,1,8]

10

3 (S) [3]
5

1
[3,1] 2 6 [3,1,6]

Route Reply
Route reply packet (RREP) is sent back to source along reversed loose source route of clusterheads. Each clusterhead along the way incrementally compute a hop-by-hop strict source route.

11 (D)

the reversed loose source route of RREP: [11,8,1,3] 3 (S) [11,9,4,3] the computed strict source route of 3->11 is: [11,9,4,3]

[11,9] 4 [11,9,4] 1 [11,9,4] 2 5

9 8

[11]
10

Route Reply
Route reply packet (RREP) is sent back to source along reversed loose source route of clusterheads. Each clusterhead along the way incrementally compute a hop-by-hop strict source route.

11 (D)

the reversed loose source route of RREP: [11,8,1,3] 3 (S) the computed strict source route of 3->11 is: [11,9,4,3]

9 4 1 2 5 8 10

Route Error Detection


Use source routing for actual packet forwarding A forwarding node sends a Route Error Message (ERR) to packet source if the next hop in source route is unreachable

11 (D)
Source route header of data packet: [3,4,9,11]

9 4 8 1 2 5 10

3 (S)
Route error (ERR) down link: {9->11}

Local Route Repair in CBRP


Objective
Increase Packet Delivery Ratio Save Route Rediscovery flooding traffic Reduce overall route acquisition delay

Mechanism
Spatial Locality

Local Route Repair


A forwarding node repairs a broken route using its 2-hop-topology information and modifies source route header accordingly. Destination node sends a gratuitous route reply to inform source of the modified route 11 (D) Source route header of data packet: [3,4,9,11]

9 4 8 1 2 5 10

3 (S)
Route error (ERR) down link: {9->11}

Local Route Repair


A forwarding node repairs a broken route using its 2-hop-topology information and modifies source route header accordingly. Destination node sends a gratuitous route reply to inform source of the modified route 11 (D) Source route header of data packet: [3,4,9,11]

9 4 8 1 2 5 10

3 (S)
Modified source route [3,4,9,8,11]

Local Route Repair


A forwarding node repairs a broken route using its 2-hop-topology information and modifies source route header accordingly. Destination node sends a gratuitous route reply to inform source of the modified route 11 (D) Source route header of data packet: [3,4,9,11]

9 4 8 1 2 5 10

3 (S)
Gratuitous route reply [3,4,9,8,11]

Utilize Unidirectional links


Cause of unidirectional links
Hidden Terminal Difference in transmitter power or receiver sensitivity.

Pitfalls with unilinks


Discovery of (dead) unilinks Problems with 802.11 RTS/CTS/Snd/Ack, ARP

Utilize Unidirectional links


Selective use of Unilinks in CBRP

Supercluster
Taking advantage of hidden stability from the changing topology Better support for natural mobility patterns Merge stable clusters into supercluster to be further studied

Performance Evaluation
Goals
show the robustness of CBRPs packet delivery with reduced overhead. evaluate how CBRP scales to larger networks compare different design alternatives (with/without local repair) compare CBRP with other MANET routing protocols

Tools
ns (network simulator) with wireless extension. features
models Lucent WaveLAN DSSS radio with signal attenuation, collision and capture. implements IEEE 802.11 link layer

Simulation Environment
Mobility Model (random way-point)
Nodes move within a fixed rectangular area m x n Each node chooses a random destination and move toward it at a speed uniformly distributed between 0 and

max_speed

When reaching its destination, a node pauses for pause_time before start moving again.

Traffic Model
A node creates a session with a randomly selected destination node. Packets of fixed size 128 byte are sent with constant sending rate of 4 pkts/sec

Simulation Parameters
Simulator parameters
channel bandwidth max_speed 2Mbps transmission range 250m 20m/s simulated time 600s

CBRP implementation parameters


Route Request Retransmit Interval
(exponential backoff)

500ms 30s 50 50

Timeout for packets without a route Network interface buffer size Send buffer size at the packet originator

1. Packet delivery ratio with respect to network mobility


Network mobility is directly affected by pause_time. pause_time has value {0, 30s, 60s, 120s, 300s, 600s} with 0 representing constant mobility and 600s signifying a stationary network.
Packet Delivery Ratio for 50-node network (30 CBR sources, 128-byte packets)
1
packet delivery ratio

0.95 0.9
CBRP

0.85 0.8
CBRP-w/o repair DSR DSDV

0.75 0.7 0 150 300 pause time

450

600

2. Packet delivery ratio with respect to network size


Simulated network of nodes {25, 50, 75, 100, 150} with constant mobility, 60% of nodes have active CBR sessions.
Packet Delivery Ratio with increasing number of nodes
1
packet delivery ratio

0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 25 50 75 100 125 150


number of nodes

CBRP CBRP-w/o repair DSR

2. Routing Overhead with respect to network size


Routing overhead(normalized) = #routing pkts sent/ #data pkts delivered.
Routing Overhead with increasing number of nodes
8
routing overhead
CBRP

CBRP-w/o repair DSR

0 25 50

number of nodes

75

100

125

150

Milestones
Aug 98, CBRP as Internet Draft Aug 98, in Chicago Presentation to the IETF Oct 98, presentation to MMlab, EE, NUS Nov 98, Presentation to IETF in Orlando Mar 99, paper submitted to Globecom99

Limitations of CBRP
Source Routing, overhead bytes per packet

Clusters small, 2 levels of hierarchy, scalable to an extend

Conclusion
CBRP is a robust/scalable routing protocol superior to the existing proposals Further study on Superclustering

QoS, Multicast support in CBRP