InterMR

1

• InterMR
• (Inter-MANET Routing for Heterogeneous MANETs)

SeungHoon Lee, Mario Gerla (UCLA) Starsky H.Y.
Wong, Kang-Won Lee (IBM Research) Chi-Kin Chau,
Jon Crowcroft (University of Cambridge, UK)
8-Nov-13
2
Challenges Motivation

• Heterogeneous Wireless Networks

Medical crew (MC)
Police (P)
- WiFi
- WiMAX
- DSDV
- OSLR
Firefighter (F)
1, Different technologies
- WiFi
- AODV
2, Different routings
3, Different policies
2
8-Nov-13
3
Challenges Motivation

• Heterogeneous Wireless Networks

Medical crew (MC)
Police (P)
- WiFi
- WiMAX
- DSDV
- OSLR
Firefighter (F)
1, Different technologies
- WiFi
- AODV
2, Different routings
3, Different policies
How can we enable interoperation among
heterogeneous MANETs ?
3
8-Nov-13
4
Related works (1)

• Hybrid Routing (e.g., SHARP1)
• 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

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
4
8-Nov-13
5
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

3 Y. Rekhter and T. Li. RFC 1771 A Border
Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4), March 1995.
5
8-Nov-13
6
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
8-Nov-13
7
InterMR (Inter-MANET Routing for Heterogeneous
MANETs)
7
8-Nov-13
8
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
9
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
10
Protocol Architecture InterMR Component

• Interacts with intra-MANET protocol stack

Internal Protocol Stack
APP Traffic (CBR, video etc)
Routing AODV/DSDV/TORA/DSR
Routing Table
MAC/Link 802.11a/b/
PHY Interface 0 (base interface)
10
11
Protocol Architecture InterMR Component

• Interacts with intra-MANET protocol stack

Internal Protocol Stack
11
12
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

MANET B
MANET A
Gateway
B2
A2
A1
B1
8-Nov-13
12
13
Protocol Architecture Gateway

• Roles of Gateway
• Handling inter-MANET routing
• Enforcing inter-MANET routing policies
• Monitoring security and performing authentication

MANET B
MANET A
Gateway
B2
A2
A1
B1
8-Nov-13
13
14
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

MANET B
MANET A
Gateway
e-InterMR
B2
A2
A1
B1
i-InterMR
Non-Gateway
8-Nov-13
14
15
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
16
Dynamic MANET Addressing

• Bloom Filter MANET address generation

Bloom Filter(BF)
B3
0 1 1 0 1 1
B2
B1
Hash
b1
b2
MANET address
16
17
Dynamic MANET Addressing

• Bloom Filter MANET address generation
• MANET Split ? Generating New Bloom filters/ MANET
  addresses

Bloom Filter(BF)
Hash
B3
MANET addr
0 0 1 0 1 1
B1
b1
Bloom Filter(BF)
Hash
B2
MANET addr
0 1 0 0 0 1
b2
17
18
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

Gateway Gateway
InterMR Base
Inter-MANET information Intra-MANET destinations
18
8-Nov-13
19
Protocol Architecture Example
MANET A (AODV)
MANET B (DSDV)
MANET C (DSR)
B3
B2
a1
A1
C1
B1
b1
c1
b2
a2
19
8-Nov-13
20
Protocol Architecture Example
MANET A (AODV)
MANET B (DSDV)
MANET C (DSR)
e-InterMR
B3
e-InterMR
B2
a1
e-InterMR
A1
C1
B1
b1
c1
b2
a2
i-InterMR
C1 C1
InterMR DSR

B2 B2
InterMR DSDV

B1 B1
InterMR DSDV

A1 A1
InterMR AODV

dst a1, a2
BFa1, a2,A1
BFa1,a2, A1 next MANET A
BFa1,a2,A1 next B1
BFa1,a2,A1 next MANET B
20
8-Nov-13
21
Protocol Architecture Example
MANET A (AODV)
MANET B (DSDV)
MANET C (DSR)
B3
e-InterMR
B2
a1
e-InterMR
A1
C1
B1
b1
c1
b2
a2
i-InterMR
C1 C1
InterMR DSR

B2 B2
InterMR DSDV

B1 B1
InterMR DSDV

A1 A1
InterMR AODV

BFa1,a2,A1 next B1 BFb1,b2..B3 BFc1,C1
next MANET C
BFa1,a2,A1 next MANET B BFb1,b2,B3 next
MANET B BFc1,C1
dst b1, b2 B1,B3
dst c1, C1
dst b1, b2 B1,B3
BFa1,a2, A1 next MANET A BFb1,b2.,..B3 BF
c1,C1 next B2
dst a1, a2
BFa1, a2,A1 BFb1,b2..B3 next
MANETB BFc1,C1 next MANET B
21
8-Nov-13
22
Gateway Deployment

• 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 B (DSDV)
MANET A2 (AODV)
Necessitate an adaptive approach
23
Dynamic Gateway Election

• 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

24
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Initial topology
• Active gateways G1, G2, G3, G4
• Inactive gateways G5
• Topology change

25
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• 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

• Step 2 Exchange connectivity information
• Gateways exchange beacons in the same MANET
• Beacons contain the connectivity info.

i-InterMR Control Message
27
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 2 Exchange connectivity information
• Gateways exchange beacons in the same MANET
• Beacons contain the connectivity info.

G1
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
i-InterMR Control Message
28
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 2 Exchange connectivity information
• Gateways exchange beacons in the same MANET
• Beacons contain the connectivity info.

G1
G2
G3
G4
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
i-InterMR Control Message
29
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum
  of GWs
• Local Decision

G1
G2
G3
G4
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
30
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum
  of GWs
• Local Decision

G1
G2
G3
G4
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
31
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum
  of GWs
• Local Decision

G1
G2
G3
G4
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
32
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum
  of GWs
• Local Decision

G1
G2
G3
G4
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
33
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum
  of GWs
• Local Decision

G1
G2
G3
G4
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
34
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum
  of GWs
• Local Decision

G1
G2
G3
G4
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
Active!
35
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum
  of GWs
• Local Decision

G1
G2
G3
G4
G1 MANET A, B G2 - G3 MANET C G4 MANET A,
B G5 MANET D MANET A, B, C, D
Inactive
36
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Covers all of reachable MANETs with the minimum
  of GWs
• Local Decision

37
Dynamic Gateway Election Example

• Step 3 Elect Active Gateways
• Local Decision
• G1 Active
• G2 Active ? Inactive
• G3 Active
• G4 Active ? Inactive
• G5 Inactive ? Active

38
Evaluation

• 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

39
Evaluation (1) Reference Point Group Mobility

• Outperforms Static GW assignment scheme
• Guarantees inter-MANET connectivity
• Adaptively elects more/less number of active GWs
  as network topology changes

39
8-Nov-13
40
Evaluation (2) Random Waypoint

• Network Connectivity decreases with RWP
• InterMR elects more active GWs

40
8-Nov-13
41
Conclusion

• 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.

41
8-Nov-13
42
Question Answer
Thank you!
42
8-Nov-13