Bandwidth Management Framework for IP based Mobile Ad Hoc Networks

1
Bandwidth Management Framework forIP based
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks

• Khalid Iqbal (41152190)
• Supervisor Dr. Rajan Shankaran
• ITEC810

June 05, 2009
2
Problem Statement

• Incorporating scalable bandwidth
  management scheme in an IP based mobile ad hoc
  network environment

3
Agenda

• IP based Mobile Ad Hoc Network
• MANET Applications
• Quality of Service (QoS)
• MANET Routing Protocols
• QoS Models
• Existing QoS models in MANET environment
• QoS models designed for MANETs
• Ad Hoc Extensions for ASAP

4
IP based Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANET)

• Collection of wireless nodes
• Connected through wireless links
• Free to move, Self-configuring
• No pre-existing infrastructure
• Dynamic topology
• Distributed operations

5
IP based Mobile Ad Hoc Networks (MANET)
6
MANET Applications

• Military battlefield
• Commercial Level
• Disaster relief efforts (flood, earthquake)
• Local Level
• Class room network
• Home network

7
Quality of Service (QoS)

• Capability of a network to provide better
  services to selected network traffic.
• Need for QoS in MANETs
• Bandwidth management
• Resource management
• Application requirements

Applications QoS Requirements
Email, File Transfer Very tolerant of delay low
Real Audio Very sensitive to delay High
Streaming Video Very sensitive to delay High
8
MANET Routing Protocols

• Proactive or Table-driven protocols
• Maintain routing information
• Waste of bandwidth
• Immediate availability of routing information
• Reactive or On-demand protocols
• No routing table
• Path calculation before transmission
• Less overhead, slower
• Hybrid protocols
• Combination of both
• Zone organization
• Within zone proactive scheme
• Outside reactive scheme

9
QoS Models

• Integrated Services (IntServ)
• Management and packet scheduling on a per flow
  basis
• Difficult and costly for the routers
• Differentiated Services (DiffServ)
• QoS control on a service class basis
• QoS is invoked on packet-by-packet basis
• Feasible and cost-effective

10
QoS Models

• Integrated Services (IntServ)

11
QoS Models (Cont.)

• Differentiated Services (DiffServ)

12
Existing QoS models in MANET environment
(Limitations)

• IntServ in MANETs
• Scalability
• Protocol phases
• Connection establishment, maintenance, teardown
• DiffServ in MANETs
• SLA
• traffic conditioning rules, placed at the nodes
• Ambiguous core network

13
QoS models for MANETs

• Flexible QoS Model for Mobile Ad Hoc
  Network (FQMM)
• Hybrid per-flow and per-class provisioning
• Nodes have dynamic role
• FQMM Limitations
• Scalability problem
• Fail to satisfy hard QoS requirements.

14
QoS models for MANETs (Cont.)

• Adaptive Reservation and Pre-allocation QoS
  Architecture (ASAP)
• For Infrastructure based networks
• Soft/Hard Reservation
• QoS Monitoring
• Periodic investigation
• more frequent monitoring, if the network is
  unstable

15
Limitations of ASAP

• Flow Restoration Problem
• Flow restoration can be quite long
• Detecting a missing reservation.
• Reverse Path Problem
• Outdated paths
• unsymmetrical paths

16
Solutions to address ASAP problems

• Local Repair
• Dynamic Virtual Path
• Flexible Timing Control
• Congestion Control

17
Solutions to address ASAP problems (Cont..)

• Local Repair
• Flow path broken because of dynamic topology
• No QoS guarantee from broken point to destination
• Quick repairing mechanism
• local repair triggered by a soft reservation
  message
• Upon receiving a SR message, node reserves some
  bandwidth
• Dynamic Virtual Path
• Unsymmetrical routes

18
Solutions to address ASAP problems (Cont..)

• Flexible Timing Control
• SR (Soft Reservation) sending interval and the
  soft state time-out period.
• Stable network - Large SR interval
• Coherent SR and soft state time-out period
• too large soft state time-out will keep
  reservations on

19
Solutions to address ASAP problems (Cont..)

• Congestion Control
• Queue length is not a valid indication
• Congestion detection by monitoring the wireless
  channel
• Approximation of the bandwidth usage
• Increase or decrease transmission throughput

20

• ?