intermr ( inter - m anet r outing for heterogeneous manets)
DESCRIPTION
SeungHoon Lee, Mario Gerla (UCLA) Starsky H.Y. Wong, Kang-Won Lee (IBM Research) Chi-Kin Chau, Jon Crowcroft (University of Cambridge, UK). InterMR ( Inter - M ANET R outing for Heterogeneous MANETs). 7-Sep-14. Challenges & Motivation. Heterogeneous Wireless Networks. Medical crew (MC). - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
InterMR
(Inter-MANET Routing for Heterogeneous MANETs)
Apr 21, 2023 1
SeungHoon Lee, Mario Gerla (UCLA)Starsky H.Y. Wong, Kang-Won Lee (IBM Research)
Chi-Kin Chau, Jon Crowcroft (University of Cambridge, UK)
Challenges & Motivation
2 Apr 21, 2023
Police (P)Medical crew (MC)
Firefighter (F)
1, Different technologies
2, Different routings
3, Different policies
- WiFi- AODV
- WiFi- DSDV- WiMAX
- OSLR
Heterogeneous Wireless Networks
04/21/23 2
Challenges & Motivation
3 Apr 21, 2023
Police (P)Medical crew (MC)
Firefighter (F)
1, Different technologies
2, Different routings
3, Different policies
- WiFi- AODV
- WiFi- DSDV- WiMAX
- OSLR
How can we enable interoperation among heterogeneous MANETs ?
Heterogeneous Wireless Networks
04/21/23 3
Related works (1)
Hybrid Routing (e.g., SHARP[1]) Balancing between proactive & reactive Combining two different routing protocols
Cluster-based networking in MANETs [2] Forming self-organizing clusters Routing between cluster of nodes
Main goal is to improve the routing performance in a single MANET
4 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 4
[1] V. Ramasubramanian, Z. J. Haas, and E. G. Sirer. SHARP: A hybrid adaptive routing protocol for mobile ad hoc networks. In Proc. ACM MOBIHOC, June 2003.[2] Xiaoyan Hong, Mario Gerla, Yunjung Yi, Kaixin Xu and Taek Jin Kwon. “Scalable Ad Hoc Routing in Large, Dense Wireless Networks Using Clustering and Landmarks In Proc. ICC ‘02
Related works (2) Border Gateway Protocol(BGP) [3]
Inter-domain routing among heterogeneous domains(ASs) Enabling administrative control over intra-domain and inter-domain
routing policy
BGP is for wired networks, not suitable for dynamic topology changes
5 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 5
[3] Y. Rekhter and T. Li. RFC 1771: A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4), March 1995.
Challenges & Motivation
Inadequacy of existing ad hoc routing for MANETs Improves network performance in a single MANET
Limitations of BGP Not suitable for mobility No split/merge Only works well with hierarchical prefixes
6 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 6
InterMR (Inter-MANET Routing for Heterogeneous
MANETs)
7 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 7
Design Goals
(1) Preserve internal protocol architecture No changes required in intra-MANET protocol stack InterMR operates with any protocols
(2) Effectively handle inter/intra MANET topology changes, while seamlessly providing inter-MANET routing
8 04/21/23 8
Main Contributions
(1) A new inter-MANET protocol architecture
(2) Content/Attribute based MANET addressing Transparent to split/merge No DNS requirements
(3) Dynamic Gateway Election Maximizing network performance yet minimizing
protocol overhead
9 04/21/23 9
Protocol Architecture: InterMR Component Interacts with intra-MANET protocol stack
10 04/21/23 10
Routing: AODV/DSDV/TORA/DSR
APP Traffic (CBR, video etc)
RoutingTable
MAC/Link: 802.11a/b/…
PHY Interface 0 (base interface)
Internal Protocol Stack
Interacts with intra-MANET protocol stack
11 04/21/23 11
Routing: AODV/DSDV/TORA/DSR
APP Traffic (CBR, video etc)
RoutingTable
MAC/Link: 802.11a/b/…
PHY Interface 0 (base interface)
InterMR
InterMRTable
MAC/Link: 802.11a/b/…
PHY Interface 1
InterMRApplication Traffic and Existing Routing traffic unaware of InterMR
Optional
Internal Protocol Stack
Protocol Architecture: InterMR Component
Protocol Architecture: Gateway
Gateway maintains InterMR component Subset of nodes in each MANET Maintains intra/inter MANET topology information
Propagating intra-MANET information to outside Receiving inter-MANET information from other Gateways
12
Apr 21, 2023
04/21/23 12
MANET AMANET A Gateway MANET BMANET B
A1A2B1
B2
Protocol Architecture: Gateway
Roles of Gateway Handling inter-MANET routing Enforcing inter-MANET routing policies Monitoring security and performing authentication
13 04/21/23 13
Apr 21, 2023
MANET AMANET A Gateway MANET BMANET B
A1A2B1
B2
Protocol Architecture: e-InterMR, i-InterMR
e-InterMR Inter-MANET communication by broadcasting (single hop) Detecting external topology change (e-InterMR beacon) Exchanging Inter-MANET routing information
i-InterMR Intra-MANET communication by underlying routing protocol Detecting internal topology change (i-InterMR beacon) Synchronizing Inter-MANET routing information among intra
Gateways
14
Apr 21, 2023
04/21/23 14
MANET AMANET A Gateway MANET BMANET Be-InterMR
i-InterMR
A1A2B1
B2
Non-Gateway
Dynamic MANET Addressing Dynamic MANET Split/Merge
Detection by periodic i-InterMR beacon
Unique MANET Address Generate a new MANET address based on attributes inside MANET
IP addresses, MAC, symbolic name, type of nodes (e.g., vehicle), contents stored in nodes
Represented by Bloom Filter Guarantee uniqueness of MANTET address
To avoid routing inconsistencies/loops Simply check attributes of each MANET
15 04/21/23 15
Dynamic MANET Addressing Bloom Filter & MANET address generation
16 04/21/23 16
B1
B2
b1b2
B3
0 1 1 0 1 1
Bloom Filter(BF)
MANET address
Hash
Dynamic MANET Addressing Bloom Filter & MANET address generation
MANET Split Generating New Bloom filters/ MANET addresses
17 04/21/23 17
B1
B2
b1
b2
B3
0 0 1 0 1 1
Bloom Filter(BF)
0 1 0 0 0 1
Bloom Filter(BF)
Hash
Hash
MANET addr
MANET addr
Protocol Architecture: Routing Tables
Gateway maintains two routing tables InterMR routing table
Inter-MANET topology information Bloom filter of each MANET, next hop info.
Base routing table (i.e., AODV or DSDV) Intra-MANET topology information
destinations in the same MANET
18 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 18
Gateway
InterMR Base
Inter-MANET information
Intra-MANET destinations
04/21/23 19
Protocol Architecture: Example
19 Apr 21, 2023
A1B1
B2
MANET A (AODV) MANET B (DSDV)
C1
MANET C (DSR)
b1b2
c1
B3
a1
a2
Protocol Architecture: Example
20 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 20
e-InterMRA1B2
MANET A (AODV) MANET B (DSDV)
C1
MANET C (DSR)
A1
InterMR AODV
C1
InterMR DSR
B2
InterMR DSDV
B1
InterMR DSDV
e-InterMR
i-InterMR
a1
b1b2
c1
dst:
a1, a2
BF[a1, a2,A1]
BF[a1,a2, A1]
next: MANET A
BF[a1,a2,A1]
next: B1
BF[a1,a2,A1]
next: MANET B
B3
B1
e-InterMR
a2
Protocol Architecture: Example
21 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 21
e-InterMRA1B2
MANET A (AODV) MANET B (DSDV)
C1
MANET C (DSR)
A1
InterMR AODV
C1
InterMR DSR
B2
InterMR DSDV
B1
InterMR DSDV
e-InterMR
i-InterMR
a1
b1b2
c1
dst:
a1, a2
BF[a1, a2,A1]
BF[b1,b2..B3] next: MANETB
BF[c1,C1] next: MANET B
BF[a1,a2, A1] next: MANET A
BF[b1,b2.,..B3]
BF[c1,C1] next: B2
BF[a1,a2,A1]
next: B1
BF[b1,b2..B3]
BF[c1,C1] next: MANET C
BF[a1,a2,A1]
next: MANET B
BF[b1,b2,…B3]
next: MANET B
BF[c1,C1]
B3
B1
a2
dst:
b1, b2
B1,B3
dst:
b1, b2
B1,B3
dst:
c1, C1
22
Static assignment may result: Inter-MANET connectivity gets lost with node mobility Node mobility causes
Loss of connectivity: Gateways are not able to communicate with other gateways
Partition Isolation: A partition without any gateways
MANET A1
(AODV)
MANET A1
(AODV)MANET B
(DSDV)
MANET B
(DSDV) A1 B1 B2
MANET A2
(AODV)
MANET A2
(AODV)
Necessitate an adaptive approach
A2
A3
A4
Gateway Deployment
23
Design Goals Maximize network performance (i.e., inter-MANET connectivity) Minimize the protocol overhead/ resource consumption
(i.e., minimum number of active gateways)
Distributed algorithm Local decision by each gateway
Become active only necessary
Dynamic Gateway Election
24
• Initial topology• Active gateways: G1, G2, G3, G4• Inactive gateways: G5
• Topology change
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3G5
G1
G4
G2
25
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
• Step 1: Collect Inter-MANET connectivity information– By e-InterMR
G1: MANET A, B
G4: MANET A, B
G2: -
G3: MANET C
G5: MANET D
e-InterMR Control Message
26
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
i-InterMR Control Message
• Step 2: Exchange connectivity information– Gateways exchange beacons in
the same MANET– Beacons contain the
connectivity info.
27
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
i-InterMR Control Message
• Step 2: Exchange connectivity information– Gateways exchange beacons in
the same MANET– Beacons contain the
connectivity info.
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
G1
28
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
i-InterMR Control Message
• Step 2: Exchange connectivity information– Gateways exchange beacons in
the same MANET– Beacons contain the
connectivity info.
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5
29
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Covers all of reachable
MANETs with the minimum # of GWs
Local Decision
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
30
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Covers all of reachable
MANETs with the minimum # of GWs
Local Decision
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
31
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Covers all of reachable
MANETs with the minimum # of GWs
Local Decision
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
32
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Covers all of reachable
MANETs with the minimum # of GWs
Local Decision
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
33
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Covers all of reachable
MANETs with the minimum # of GWs
Local Decision
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5
34
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Covers all of reachable
MANETs with the minimum # of GWs
Local Decision
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5
Active!
35
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Covers all of reachable
MANETs with the minimum # of GWs
Local Decision
G1: MANET A, BG2: -G3: MANET CG4: MANET A, BG5: MANET D
MANET: A, B, C, D
G1 G2 G3 G4 G5
Inactive
36
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G4G1
G5G2
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Covers all of reachable
MANETs with the minimum # of GWs
Local Decision
37
Dynamic Gateway Election: Example
G3
G1
Step 3: Elect Active Gateways Local Decision
G1: Active
G2: Active Inactive
G3: Active
G4: Active Inactive
G5: Inactive Active
G4
G5G2
38
Implemented InterMR in NS2
Performance metrics # of Active gateways elected Connectivity (# of reachable destinations)
Settings Mobility Patterns
Reference Point Group Mobility (RPGM) Random Waypoint Mobility
100 nodes with 2 MANETs, 4 MANETs Area: 1500mx1500m, 2000mx2000m
Evaluation
Evaluation (1) – Reference Point Group Mobility
39 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 39
Outperforms Static GW assignment scheme Guarantees inter-MANET connectivity
Adaptively elects more/less number of active GWs as network topology changes
Evaluation (2) – Random Waypoint
40 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 40
Network Connectivity decreases with RWP InterMR elects more active GWs
Conclusion
41 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 41
Designed a novel Inter-MANET Routing protocol (InterMR) Handles heterogeneity of MANETs & node mobility Adaptively adjusts to topology changes via dynamic GW
election Scalable, yet maximizing network performance
Implemented, evaluated InterMR NS2, various mobility patterns Effectively achieves the maximal performance
Future work Various performance metrics on gateway election
Resource balancing, Routing Policy, etc.
Question & Answer
42 Apr 21, 202304/21/23 42
Thank you!