24
MSWiM, October 2010 1 Throughput Characteristics of Free-Space-Optical Mobile Ad-hoc Networks Mehmet Bilgi and Murat Yuksel {mbilgi,yuksem}@cse.unr.edu Computer Science and Engineering University of Nevada – Reno Project Website: http://www.cse.unr.edu/~yuksem/fso-manet.htm

Throughput Characteristics of Free-Space-Optical Mobile Ad-hoc Networks

  • Upload
    zalika

  • View
    28

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Mehmet Bilgi and Murat Yuksel { mbilgi,yuksem}@cse.unr.edu Computer Science and Engineering University of Nevada – Reno Project Website: http://www.cse.unr.edu/~yuksem/fso-manet.htm. Throughput Characteristics of Free-Space-Optical Mobile Ad-hoc Networks. Collaborators. Faculty: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

1

Throughput Characteristics of Free-Space-Optical Mobile Ad-hoc Networks

Mehmet Bilgi and Murat Yuksel{mbilgi,yuksem}@cse.unr.edu

Computer Science and EngineeringUniversity of Nevada – Reno

Project Website: http://www.cse.unr.edu/~yuksem/fso-manet.htm

Page 2: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

2

Collaborators

Faculty: Murat Yuksel ([email protected]), Univ. of

Nevada, Reno Mona Hella ([email protected]), Rensselaer

Polytechnic Institute

Students: Abdullah Sevincer ([email protected]) (M.S.),

UNR Mehmet Bilgi ([email protected]) (Ph.D.), UNR Michelle Ramirez ([email protected])

(B.S.), UNR

Page 3: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

3

Outline

Motivation & Vision FSO Simulation Modules

FSO Propagation LOS Alignment Protocol

Validation Simulations Throughput Simulations Summary and Conclusions

Page 4: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

4Wireless: Spectrum Constraints

Source: Chris Ramming/DARPA: CBMANETS overview

Page 5: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

5

Dense Deployment: No Help Beyond a Point

As we add more RF nodes, per-node throughput diminishes

Dense deployment of many omni-directional antennas increase interference

sqrt(N) as N increases (Gupta, Kumar, Tran. on Inf. Theo. 2000)

Can become linear with hierarchical cooperative MIMO imposing constraints on topology and mobility pattern (Ozgur et al., Tran. on Inf. Theo. 2006)

None is able to totally eliminate the scaling problemThe RF spectrum is getting saturated.. We need alternative communication spectrum resources.

Page 6: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

6Free-Space-Optical (FSO): open spectrum

Open spectrum: 2.4GHz, 5.8GHz, 60GHz, > 300 GHz

Lots of open spectrum up in the optical regime!

FSO usage: point-to-point links interconnects indoor infrared

communications

DoD use of FSO: Satellite communications DARPA ORCL project: air-to-

ground, air-to-air, air-to-satellite

802.11a/g, 802.16e,Cellular (2G/3G)

Page 7: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

7Optical Wireless: Commodity components

Many FSO components are very low cost and available for mass production.

Lasers…

LEDs…

VCSELs…

IrDAs…

Page 8: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

8

FSO-MANETs VisionFree-Space-Optical

(FSO) Communications

Mobile Ad-Hoc Networking

• High bandwidth• Low power• Dense spatial reuse• License-free band of operation

• Mobile communication• Auto-configuration

Free-Space-OpticalAd Hoc Networks

• Spatial reuse and angular diversity in nodes• Low power and secure• Electronic auto-alignment• Optical auto-configuration (switching, routing)

Page 9: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

9

Optical Wireless: Why? Positive points:

More Secure: Highly directional + small size & weight => low probability of interception (LPI)

High-brightness LEDs (HBLEDs) are very low cost and highly reliable components

35-65 cents a piece, and $2-$5 per transceiver package + upto 10 years lifetime

Very low power consumption (100 microwatts for 10-100 Mbps!)

Even lower power for 1-10 Mbps 4-5 orders of magnitude improvement in

energy/bit compared to RF Huge spatial reuse => multiple parallel

channels for huge bandwidth increases due to spectral efficiency

Issues: Need line-of-sight (LOS); and alignment of LOS

Can we leverage these benefits while solving the issues?

Page 10: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

10

FSO Issues/Disadvantages Limited range (no waveguide, unlike fiber optics) Need line-of-sight (LOS)

Any obstruction or poor weather (fog, heavy rain/snow) can increase BER in a bursty manner

Bigger issue: Need tight LOS alignment: LOS alignment must be changed/maintained with

mobility or sway! Effects of relative distance and mobility Received power

Spatial profile: ~ Gaussian drop off

Page 11: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

11

FSO Modules: Alignment Protocol

Goal: Provide an FSO link with “seamless” alignment

Steer the data transmission among the transceivers as the nodes move with respect to each other

Need a 3-way handshake among the transceivers to assure a bidirectional alignment

Page 12: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

12

FSO Modules: Alignment Protocol

Send “search” frames periodically

need an “alignment timer”

Receive data frames only after alignment is established

might still get wrong or erroneous frames – leave them to the higher layers

State diagram of LOS alignment protocol

SendingSYN_ACK

Target Node = i

Recv(ACK, i)

Recv(SYN | SYN_ACK | DATA)

Recv(ACK, j)

Discard

Not AlignedSending SYN

Recv(SYN_ACK, i)

Recv(SYN, i)Start

Recv(ACK | DATA)

Discard

Aligned

Target Node = iRecv(SYN_ACK | ACK)

Recv(DATA, j)

Recv(DATA, i)

Discard

SendingACK

Target Node = i Recv(DATA, i)

Recv(SYN | SYN_ACK | ACK)

Recv(DATA, j)

Discard

ProcessData

Recv(SYN, i)

Alignment TimerTimeout

Page 13: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

13

FSO Modules: Alignment Protocol

Maintain “alignment lists” to keep track of which transceiver is aligned with which neighbor

Page 14: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

14

FSO Modules: Propagation & Interference

FSO Propagation Geometric Attenuation

divergence angle receiver’s surface

Atmospheric Attenuation

visibility

FSO Interference Must consider the FSO

signals coming from other nodes too

Page 15: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

15

FSO Simulations in NS-2 How good/bad the

transport performance will be if we have FSO nodes with

mobility multiple transceivers?

Needed to add several things to NS-2

multi-transceiver nodes

LOS alignment protocol

FSO propagation obstacles

Page 16: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

16

TCP Throughput over FSO-MANETs

Performed several simulations..

Page 17: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

17

FSO Simulations in NS-2

Propagation validation

Page 18: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

18

FSO Simulations in NS-2 Propagation

validation

Page 19: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

19

FSO Simulations in NS-2 Propagation

validation

Page 20: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

20

FSO Simulations in NS-2Mobility is a major problem for throughput scaling!

Nodes with wider divergence angle transceivers perform better due to resemblance to RF.

Page 21: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

21

FSO Simulations in NS-2

Page 22: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

22

FSO Simulations in NS-2

Page 23: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

23

Summary & Future Work

Contributed multi-transceiver simulation modules for free-space-optical communication.

Accurate simulation of multi-transceiver FSO structures reveals differences with RF in TCP behavior.

Intermittent connectivity pattern requires re-consideration of network layers to enable cross-layer buffering.

Page 24: Throughput Characteristics of  Free-Space-Optical Mobile  Ad-hoc Networks

MSWiM, October 2010

24

Thank you!

THE END

AcknowledgmentsThis work was supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation under awards 0721452 and 0721612 and

DARPA under contract W31P4Q-08-C-0080