A Hybrid Power-Saving Protocol by

Dual-Channel and Dual-Transmission-Range C

lustering for IEEE 802.11-Based MANETs

Presented by

Jehn-Ruey Jiang
Department of Computer Science and Information Engineering
National Central University
To Rest, to Go Far!!

2/74
 Outline

 IEEE 802.11 MANETs

 Power Saving Problem
 Hybrid Power Saving Protocols
 Simulation Results
 Conclusion

3/74
 Outline

 IEEE 802.11 MANETs

 Power Saving Problem
 Hybrid Power Saving Protocols
 Simulation Results
 Conclusion

4/74
 IEEE 802.11 Overview

 Approved by IEEE in 1997

 Extensions approved in 1999 (High Rate)
 Standard for Wireless Local Area Networks
(WLAN)

5/74
WLAN Market

Source: wireless.industrial-networking.com
6/74
 IEEE 802.11 Family(1/2)

 802.11 (1997)
 2 Mbps in the 2.4 GHz band
 802.11b (1999) (WiFi, Wireless Fidelity)
 5.5 and 11 Mbps in the 2.4 GHz band
 802.11a (1999) (WiFi5)
 6 to 54 Mbps in the 5 GHz band
 802.11g (2001)
 54 Mbps in the 2.4 GHz band
 802.11n (2005) (MIMO)
 108 Mbps in the 2.4 and the 5 GHz bands
7/74
 IEEE 802.11 Family(2/2)
 802.11c
 support for 802.11 frames
 802.11d
 new support for 802.11 frames
 802.11e
 QoS enhancement in MAC
 802.11f
 Inter Access Point Protocol
 802.11h
 channel selection and power control
 802.11i
 security enhancement in MAC
 802.11j
 5 GHz globalization 8/74
 Infrastructure vs. Ad-hoc Modes
Infrastructure
Network

AP Wired Network

AP
AP

Multi-hop Ad Hoc Network

Ad-Hoc network Ad-Hoc network

9/74
 Ad Hoc Network (1/3)

 A collection of wireless mobile hosts f

orming a temporary network without
the aid of established infrastructure o
r centralized administration
 by D. B. Johnson et al.
 Also called MANET
(Mobile Ad hoc Network)
 by Internet Society IETF
10/74
 Ad Hoc Network (2/3)

 Single-Hop
 Each node is within each other’s transmissi
on range
 Fully connected
 Multi-Hop
 A node reaches another node via a chain of
intermediate nodes
 Networks may partition and/or merge

11/74
 Ad Hoc Network (3/3)

 Application
 Battlefields
 Disaster Rescue

 Spontaneous Meetings

 Outdoor Activities

12/74
 Outline

 IEEE 802.11 MANETs

 Power Saving Problem
 Hybrid Power Saving Protocols
 Simulation Results
 Conclusion

13/74
 Power Saving Problem

 Battery is a limited resource for portable de

vices
 Battery technology does not progress fast
enough
 Power saving becomes a critical issue in M
ANETs, in which devices are all supported
by batteries

14/74
 Solutions to Power Saving Problems

 PHY Layer: transmission power control

 Huang (ICCCN’01), Ramanathan (INFOCOM’00)
 MAC Layer: power mode management
 Tseng (INFOCOM’02), Chiasserini (WCNC’00)
 Network Layer: power-aware routing
 Singh (ICMCN’98), Ryu (ICC’00)

15/74
 Transmission Power Control

 Tuning transmission energy for higher channel

reuse
 Example:
 A is sending to B (based on IEEE 802.11)
 Can (C, D) and (E, F) join? No!
Yes!

B
C
D
A F E

16/74
 Power Mode Management

 Doze mode vs. Active mode

 Example:
 A is sending to B
 Does C need to stay awake? No
!
It can turn off its radio
B to save energy!
A But it should turn on its
C
radio periodiclally for p
ossible data comm.

17/74
 Power-Aware Routing

 Routing in an ad hoc network with energy-

saving (prolonging network lifetime) in mind
 Example:

N1 + N2 +
SRC – – DES
T
+ Better!! +
– –
+
+
N3 N4 –
–
18/74
 Our Focus

 Among the three solutions:

 PHY Layer: transmission power control
 MAC Layer: power mode management
 Network Layer: power-aware routing

19/74
 IEEE 802.11 PS Mode
An IEEE 802.11 Card is allowed to turn off it
s radio to be in the PS mode to save energy
Power Consumption:
(ORiNOCO IEEE 802.11b PC Gold Card)

Vcc:5V, Speed:11Mbps
20/74
 MAC Layer Power-Saving Protocol

 Two types of MAC layer PS protocol for IEEE

802.11-based MANETs
 Synchronous (IEEE 802.11 PS Protocol)
 Synchronous Beacon Intervals
 For sending beacons and ATIM (Ad hoc Traffic Indicati
on Map)
 Asynchronous [Tseng et. al. 2002][Jiang et. al. 2003]
 Asynchronous Beacon Intervals
 For sending beacons and MTIM (Multi-Hop Traffic Indic
ation Map)

21/74
Beacon:
1. For a device to notify its
existence to others
2. For devices to synchronize
their clocks

22/74
 IEEE 802.11 PS Protocol
Target Beacon Transmission Time(TBTT)

Beacon Interval Beacon Interval

ATIM Power saving Mode ATIM Active mode

Window Window

Host A
Beacon Frame ATIM Data
No ATIM means Frame
no data to send
or to receive with
each other
ATIM Power saving Mode ATIM Active mode
Window Window

Host B
ACK ACK
Clock Synchronized
by TSF
(Time Synchronization
Function) 23/74
 IEEE 802.11 PS Protocol (cont.)

 Suitable for Single-hop environment

 Advantages
 More power efficiency
 Low active ratio (less duty cycle)
 Drawbacks
 Clock synchronization for multi-hop networks is
costly and even impossible
 Network partitioning
 Not Scalable

24/74
 Clock Drift Example

200 s Maximum
Tolerance

Max. clock drift for IEEE 802.11 TSF (200 DSSS nodes, 11Mbps, aBP=0.1s)

25/74
Network-Partitioning Example
C D
╳
F Theblue
The red ones
ones do
do not
not
A Network know the existence of
Partition
the
the blue ones,not
red ones, notto
to
╳
mention the time when
B E they are awake.
Host A
ATIM window
Host B ╳

Host C

Host D
╳
Host E

Host F

26/74
 Asynchronous PS Protocols (1/2)

 Try to solve the network partitioning

problem to achieve
 Neighbor discovery
 Wakeup prediction
 Without synchronizing hosts’ clocks

27/74
 Asynchronous PS Protocols (2/2)
 Three existent asynchronous PS
protocols

 Dominating-Awake-Interval

 Periodical-Fully-Awake-Interval

 Quorum-Based

28/74
 What is a quorum?

minimum number of people who must

be present at a meeting (of a committee,
etc) before it can proceed and its
decisions, etc can be considered valid
-- Oxford Dictionary

29/74
30/74
 What is a quorum again?

 From Math.
quorums:
mutually intersecting subsets of a universal
set U
 E.G.
{1, 2}, {2, 3} and {1,3} are quorums under
U={1,2,3}

31/74
 Numbering Beacon Intervals

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 0 1 …
Beacon interval
n consecutive beacon intervals are numbered as 0 to n-1

0 1 2 3
4 5 6 7 And they are organized
8 9 10 11
as a n  n array
12 13 14 15

32/74
 Quorum Intervals (1/4)

Intervals from one row and one column are called

Quorum Intervals
0 1 2 3
Example:
4 5 6 7
Quorum intervals are
numbered by 8 9 10 11
2, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14 12 13 14 15

33/74
 Quorum Intervals (2/4)

Intervals from one row and one column are called

Quorum Intervals
0 1 2 3
Example:
4 5 6 7
Quorum intervals are
numbered by 8 9 10 11
0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 13 12 13 14 15

34/74
 Quorum Intervals (3/4)

Any two sets of quorum intervals have two

common members

For example:
The set of quorum intervals
{0, 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 13} and 0 1 2 3
the set of quorum intervals 4 5 6 7
{2, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14} have 8 9 10 11
two common members:
12 13 14 15
2 and 9
35/74
 Quorum Intervals (4/4)

Host
D 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Host
C 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

2 overlapping quorum intervals

Host
D 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Host
C 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Even when the beacon interval numbers are not aligned
(they are rotated), there are always at least two
overlapping quorum intervals
36/74
Structure of Quorum Intervals

37/74
Networks Merge Properly
C D

F
A

B E

Host A
ATIM window
Host B

Host C Beacon window

Monitor window
Host D

Host E

Host F

38/74
 Quorum Systems Help with the Proof

 What is a quorum system?

A collection of mutually intersecting subsets of an
universal set U, where each subset is called a quorum.
E.G. {{1, 2},{2, 3},{1,3}} is a quorum system under
U={1,2,3}, where {1, 2}, {2, 3} and {1,3} are quorums.
 Not all quorum systems are applicable to QAPS
 Only those quorum systems with the rotation
closure property are applicable.

39/74
 Optimal Quorum System (1/2)

 Quorum Size Lower Bound for quorum

systems satisfying the rotation closure
property:
k, where k(k-1)+1=n, the cardinality of
the universal set, and k-1 is a prime
power
(k n )

40/74
 Optimal Quorum System (2/2)

 Optimal quorum system

 FPP quorum system

 Near optimal quorum systems

 Grid quorum system
 Torus quorum system
 Cyclic (difference set) quorum system
 E-Torus quorum system

41/74
 QAPS: Quorum-based Asynchronous
Power Saving Protocols
 Advantages
 Do not need synchronized clocks
 Suitable for multi-hop MANETs
 Asynchronous neighbor discovery and wake
up prediction
 Drawbacks
 Higher active ratio than the synchronous PS
protocol
 Not suitable for high host density environm
ent
42/74
 Outline

 IEEE 802.11 MANETs

 Power Saving Problem
 Hybrid Power Saving Protocols
 Simulation Results
 Conclusion

43/74
 HPS Overview

 A Hybrid PS protocol
 Synchronous – IEEE 802.11 PS protocol
 Asynchronous – QAPS
 Forming clustering networks
 Utilizing the concepts of dual-channel and
dual-transmission-range
 Taking advantages of two types of PS prot
ocols
 To reduce the active ratio
 Suitable for multi-hop MANETs
44/74
Cluster Forming
Cluster Head Cluster Member
1000

900

800
Simulation area (Y-axis)

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Simulation area (X-axis)

45/74
 Dual transmission ranges

 Cluster head uses

 Range RA for inter-cluster transmission
 Range RB for intra-cluster transmission

RA F
E

RB

E, F: cluster heads

46/74
 Dual channels

 Two non-interfering comm. channels are

used
 Channel A for inter-cluster transmission
 Channel B for Intra-cluster transmission

F
E
RA
RB Channel A
Channel B

E, F: cluster heads

47/74
 Two types of beacon frames

 Intra-cluster beacon
 Send in channel B with transmission range RB
 For cluster forming
 For clock synchronization
 Inter-cluster beacon
 Send in channel A with transmission range RA
 For neighboring cluster heads discovery
 For wakeup prediction

48/74
 Practical Considerations

 Dual transmission ranges

 Practical for IEEE 802.11 Standard
 More power efficiency
 Dual channels
 Practical for IEEE 802.11 Standard
 Non-interfering channels (such as 1, 6, 11)
 Inter-cluster and Intra-cluster comm. can take
place simultaneously

49/74
 Clustering
Who is Boss?
 If somebody near me says that he/she is Boss,
then I am his/her employee.

 If nobody is Boss, then I am Boss.

 Boss should keep whistling periodically to

summon employees. He/She should relay
messages for employees and thus spend more
energy.

 An employee just keep watching if Boss is there.

50/74
 State Transition
A host enters the
network initially

Do not receive intra-cluster

beacon in channel B over ( q+1
beacon intervals + a random
backoff time)
Listening State

Do not receive
intra-cluster beacon
in channel B from
cluster head over
q+1 beacon intervals
Cluster Member State
Receive an intra-cluster
beacon in channel B
during (q+1 beacon
intervals + a random
backoff time)
Broadcast intra-
Cluster Head State cluster beacon
every non-quorum
interval

Receive an intra-cluster
beacon in channel B from
the cluster head

Dismissal mechanism is invoked

51/74
RA v.s. RB

x RB y

One extreme case for infinite host density:

+
RA = RB

52/74
RA v.s. RB

x RB RB y

One extreme case for infinite host density:

-
RA = 2RB

53/74
RA v.s. RB

RB

x RB z RB y

54/74
 Structure of Beacon Intervals
quorum Interval non-quorum Interval

Cluster Head B M B M B’ M’

Active period
Active period in channel B
Active period in channel A

quorum Interval non-quorum Interval

Cluster members B’ M’

Active period in channel B

B M ： Beacon window and MTIM window in channel A

B’ M’ ： Beacon window and MTIM window in channel B

： Monitor mode in channel A

： PS mode
55/74
 Dismissal Mechanism (1/2)

 To keep the fraction of cluster heads ASAP when network

topology changes
 To balance the load of cluster heads
 But how? To detect if hosts are moving too close.
To take service time and residual engergy into consideration.

Low priorityDismissal (back to

Dismissal listening state)
High priority
Mechanism is
invoked

： Cluster heads

56/74
 Dismissal Mechanism (2/2)

 Distance
 Default Dismissal Range = 1/5 RB
 By RSSI estimation
 Priority (exchanged in inter-cluster
beacons)
 Cluster head service time
 Short service time Low priority
 Remaining battery energy
 High remaining battery energy Low priority
 Cluster head ID
 Small cluster head ID Low priority
57/74
Cluster Forming (1/2)
Cluster Head Cluster Member
1000

900

800
Simulation area (Y-axis)

700
600

500
400
300 100 hosts
200
RB 33 cluster heads
100
67 cluster members
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Simulation area (X-axis)

58/74
Cluster Forming (2/2)
Cluster Head Cluster Member
1000

900

800
Simulation area (Y-axis)

700

600

500

400

300 RB
500 hosts
200
45 cluster heads
100

0
455 cluster members
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Simulation area (X-axis)

59/74
 Routing (1/5)

 Based on AODV
 RREQ (Route request) ONLY rebroadcast by
cluster heads
 Intra-RREQ ： within a cluster using channel B
 Inter-RREQ ： between cluster heads using channel A

 RREP (Route reply)

 Intra-RREP ： within a cluster using channel B
 Inter-RREP ： between cluster heads using channel A

60/74
 Routing (2/5)
1. If the source host is a member, it undergoes
MTIM-ACK-RREQ-RREQ message exchange with
the cluster head using channel B with transmission
range RB.
2. If the cluster head receives no RREP in the same
beacon interval, it will rebroadcast the RREQ to all
its neighboring cluster heads using channel A with
transmission range RA.
3. If a host originates or receives a RREP, it will
remains in active mode in channel A. This is
prepared for the upcoming data transmission.

61/74
Routing (3/5)
Non-Quorum Interval
ATIM Active mode
Window

Cluster
member X
ATIM RREQ

ATIM Active mode

Window

Cluster
head
ACK RREP
RREQ

ATIM Active mode

Window

Cluster
member Y

62/74
Routing (4/5)

Cluster head C Cluster head B

RA
RREQ
Cluster head A RREQ
MTIM X
ACK
RREP Cluster member
RREQ

Y
RB

63/74
 Routing (5/5)
Cluster Head Cluster Member
1000
RB = Intra-cluster
900 Destination broadcast
800
Simulation area (Y-axis)

RA = Inter-cluster
700
broadcast
600

500

400
Source
300

200

100

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Simulation area (X-axis)

64/74
 Outline

 IEEE 802.11 MANETs

 Power Saving Problem
 Hybrid Power Saving Protocols
 Simulation Results
 Conclusion

65/74
 Simulation Results

 Parameters
 Area size ： 1000mx1000m
 RA ： 250m
 RB ： 125m
 Mobility ： 0~10m/sec with pause time 20 seconds
 Traffic load ： 1~4 routes/sec
 Number of hosts ： 100~1000 hosts
 Performance metrics
 Cluster head ratio
 Survival ratio
 Throughput
66/74
Cluster Head Ratio

100
90 Speed=0
Ratio of cluster heads (%)

80 Speed=5
70 Speed=10
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000

Number of hosts

67/74
 Survival Ratio

120

100
Survival ratio (%)

80

60

HPS, 100 hosts, speed=10

40
HPS, 200 hosts, speed=10
E-Torus(4x8), 100 hosts, speed=10
20
E-Torus(4x8), 200 hosts, speed=10

0
100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 400 420 440
Simulation time (sec)

68/74
Throughput Comparison with QAPS
AA, Th x Life HPS, Th x Life
E-Torus(4x8), Th x Life AA, Th
HPS, Th E-Torus(4x8), Th

16000 35
15000
14000 30
13000
Throughput x Lifetime (KB)

12000
25

Throughput (KB/sec)
11000
10000
9000 20
8000
7000 15
6000
5000 10
4000
3000
2000 5
1000
0 0
0 5 10
M oving speed (m/sec)

69/74
 Outline

 IEEE 802.11 MANETs

 Power Saving Problem
 Hybrid Power Saving Protocols
 Simulation Results
 Conclusion

70/74
 Conclusion (1/2)

 Taking advantages of both the sync. a

nd async. PS protocol, and utilizing th
e concepts of dual-channel and dual-tr
ansmission-range
 To save more energy
 To accommodate more hosts

 Without clock synchronization

 No network partitioning

71/74
 Conclusion (2/2)

 Adopting cluster-based routing to reduc

e the number of routing request rebroad
casts dramatically
 Using dismissal mechanism
 to void the ever-increasing of cluster heads
 to make the protocol adaptive to topology c

hanging
 Practical for IEEE 802.11-based MANETs

72/74
References:

1. Yu-Chee Tseng, Chih-Shun Hsu and Ten-Yueng Hsieh, “Po

wer-Saving Protocols for IEEE 802.11-Based Multi-Hop Ad
Hoc Networks,” InfoCom’2002, 2002
2. Jehn-Ruey Jiang, Yu-Chee Tseng, Chih-Shun Hsu and Te
n-Hwang Lai, “Quorum-based asynchronous power-saving
protocols for IEEE 802.11 ad hoc networks,” ACM Journal
on Mobile Networks and Applications, Feb. 2005.
(ICPP 2003 Best Paper Award)
3. Jehn-Ruey Jiang, Chau-Yuan Yang, Ting-Yao Chiou and S
hing-Tsaan Huang, "A Hybrid Power-Saving Protocol by Du
al-Channel and Dual-Transmission-Range Clustering for IE
EE 802.11-Based MANETs," International Journal of Pervas
ive Computing and Communications, to appear.

73/74
Q&A
74/74
 The States (1/3)

 Listening State
 Listen in channel B for intra-cluster beacons for a
period of (q+1 beacon intervals plus a random ba
ck-off time)

0-15 time slots with

each time slot occup
ying 20 μs

75/74
 The States (2/3)

 Cluster Head state

 Running async PS protocol
for inter-cluster comm.
 Running sync PS protocol
for inter-cluster comm.

76/74
 The States (3/3)

 Cluster Member State

 Synchronizing its clock with the cluster head’s
 Running sync PS protocol
 Adopting cluster head’s quorum information

77/74
 Rotation Closure Property (1/3)

Definition. Given a non-negative integer i

and a quorum H in a quorum system Q unde
r U = {0,…, n1}, we define rotate(H, i) = {j+
ijH} (mod n).

E.G. Let H={0,3} be a subset of U={0,…,

3}. We have rotate(H, 0)={0, 3}, rotate(H, 1)
={1,0}, rotate(H, 2)={2, 1}, rotate(H, 3)={3,
2}
78/74
 Rotation Closure Property (2/3)

Definition. A quorum system Q under U = {0

,…, n1} is said to have the rotation closure pr
operty if
G,H  Q, i  {0,…, n1}: G  rotate(H, i)  .

79/74
 Rotation Closure Property (3/3)

 For example,
 Q1={{0,1},{0,2},{1,2}} under U={0,1,2}} 
 Q2={{0,1},{0,2},{0,3},{1,2,3}} under
U={0,1,2,3} 
Because {0,1}  rotate({0,3},3) =
{0,1}  {3, 2} = 

Closure

80/74
 Examples of quorum systems

 Majority quorum system 

 Tree quorum system 
 Hierarchical quorum system 
 Cohorts quorum system

 ………

81/74
 FPP quorum system

 Proposed by Maekawa in 1985

 For solving distributed mutual exclusion
 Constructed with a hypergraph
 An edge can connect more than 2 vertices
 FPP:Finite Projective Plane
 A hypergraph with each pair of edges having exac
tly one common vertex
 Also a Singer difference set quorum system

82/74
 FPP quorum system Example

5 A FPP quorum
system:
{ {0,1,2},
3 4 {1,5,6},
6 {2,3,6},
{0,4,6},
0 1 2 {1,3,4},
{2,4,5},
{0,3,5} }
83/74
 Torus quorum system

0 1 2 3 4 5
{ {1,7,13,8,3,10},
6 7 8 9 10 11 {5,11,17,12,1,14},…}
12 13 14 15 16 17

One half column cover in a wrap around manner

One full column
For a tw torus, a quorum contains all elements f
rom some column c, plus w/2 elements, each of
which comes from column c+i, i=1.. w/2
84/74
 Cyclic (difference set) quorum system

 Def: A subset D={d1,…,dk} of Zn is called a difference

set if for every e0 (mod n), there
exist elements di and djD such that di-dj=e.
 {0,1,2,4} is a difference set under Z8
 { {0, 1, 2, 4}, {1, 2, 3, 5}, {2, 3, 4, 6}, {3, 4, 5, 7},
{4, 5, 6, 0}, {5, 6, 7, 1}, {6, 7, 0, 2}, {7, 0, 1, 3} }
is a cyclic (difference set) quorum system C(8)

85/74
E-Torus quorum system
Trunk E(t x w,
k)
Branch

Branch
cyclic
Branch

Branch
cyclic

86/74