April 19, 2023

Computer Networks COE 549Directional Antennas for Ad-

hoc NetworksTarek Sheltami

KFUPMCCSECOE

http://faculty.kfupm.edu.sa/coe/tarek/coe549.htm

2

Outline Introduction

IEEE 802.11 (CSMA/CA) overview Motivations Problem statement

Beamforming: Definition, types and advantages. Basic DMAC Challenges in Ad-hoc Networks using directional

antennas. Multi-Hop MAC (MMAC) Beamforming with Power Control Performance Evaluation

Ad Hoc Networks

04/19/23 3

A silenced node

A

B

C

D

Typically assume Omnidirectional antennas

Can Directional Antennas Improve Performance?

A

B

C

D

Not possible using Omni

04/19/23 4

A Comparison

Issues Omni Directional

Spatial Reuse Low High

Connectivity Low High

Interference Omni Directional

Cost & Complexity

Low High

04/19/23 5

Motivation

• Are directional antennas beneficial to medium access control in ad hoc networks ?

– To what extent ?

– Under what conditions ?

04/19/23 6

• Sender sends Ready-to-Send (RTS) • Receiver responds with Clear-to-Send (CTS)

• RTS and CTS announce the duration of the imminent dialogue

• Nodes overhearing RTS/CTSdefer transmission for that duration– Network Allocation Vector (NAV) remembers duration

IEEE 802.11

04/19/23 7

C FA B EDRTS

RTS = Request-to-Send

IEEE 802.11

04/19/23 8

C FA B EDRTS

RTS = Request-to-Send

IEEE 802.11

NAV = 10

04/19/23 9

C FA B EDCTS

CTS = Clear-to-Send

IEEE 802.11

04/19/23 10

C FA B EDCTS

CTS = Clear-to-Send

IEEE 802.11

NAV = 8

04/19/23 11

C FA B EDDATA

•DATA packet follows CTS. Successful data reception acknowledged using ACK.

IEEE 802.11

04/19/23 12

C FA B EDACK

IEEE 802.11

04/19/23 13

IEEE 802.11

• Channel contention resolved using backoff– Nodes choose random backoff interval from [0, CW]– Count down for this interval before transmission

Random backoff

Data Transmit

Random backoff

Wait

backoff

backoff Data Transmit

WaitA

B

04/19/23 14

Antenna Model

2 Operation Modes: Omni and Directional

A node may operate in any one mode at any given time

04/19/23 15

Antenna Model

In Omni Mode:• Let us assume that nodes receive signals with

Gain Go

In Directional Mode:• Directional Gain Gd (Gd > Go)

04/19/23 16

Directional Communication

Received Power (Tx Gain) * (Rx Gain)• Tx Gain = Transmit gain in the direction of receiver• Rx Gain = Receive gain in the direction of the transmitter

AB C

Convention: A link shown by overlapping beams along the line joining the transmitter and receiver. Nodes C, A form a link. C, B do not.

04/19/23 17

B

Directional Neighborhood

A

• When C transmits directionally

•Node A sufficiently close to receive in omni mode

•Node C and A are Directional-Omni (DO) neighbors

•Nodes C and B are not DO neighbors

C

Transmit BeamReceive Beam

04/19/23 18

Directional Neighborhood

AB C

•When C transmits directionally

• Node B receives packets from C only in directional mode

•C and B are Directional-Directional (DD) neighbors

Transmit BeamReceive Beam

04/19/23 19

• A technique in which the antenna pattern is switched (or steered) to a desired direction.

• Two types: switched & steered beam.

04/19/23 20

Antenna Beamforming

- Steered beam:

can direct the beam to the desired direction. (cost more but better performance)

- Switched beam:

can select one from a set of predefined beams/antennas

S D S D

21

1. Longer range

Why?

higher antenna gain in the desired direction

Benefits:

better connectivity and lower end-to-end delay

2. Higher spatial reuse

Why?

Reduced interference (narrower beamwidth)

Benefits:

increased capacity and throughput

04/19/23

Antenna Beamforming

22

Identify the challenges encountered in MAC when beamforming antennas are used in Ad hoc networks and find the possible solutions of those problems in the literature.

Research Problem

04/19/23

23

The two most impacted networking mechanisms as a result of using beamforming antennas are

1. Neighbor discovery identifies the one-hop neighbors

2. MAC provides distributed access to the channel

Challenges in Ad-hoc Networks

04/19/23

24

DMAC is MAC with directional (beamforming) Antennas.

Two Operation Modes: OmniOmni and Directional

A node may operate in any mode at any given time

DMAC

04/19/23

Basic DMAC

• Assumption: Location of neighbors is known.

• Sender transmits Directional-RTS (DRTS)

• A node listens omni-directionally when idle, – RTS received in Omni mode.

• Receiver sends Directional-CTS (DCTS)

• DATA, ACK transmitted and received directionally.

• Operation is the same as 802.11 but with directional antennas and , and with the use of DNAV (directional NAV)!!

04/19/23 25

26

Basic DMAC

Why DNAV (directional Network allocation Vector)?

Asnwer: to combat directional exposed terminal problem. increased spatial reuse and throughput

A C

B

E

D

04/19/23

27

Neighbor discovery

New notions of neighbors:

B

A

Nodes A and B are OOOO neighbors. Nodes C and A are not OOOO Nodes C and B are not DODO

C

but DODO neighbors.but DDDD neighbors.

Transmit antenna

Receive antenna

OO Omni Omni

DO Dir. Omni

DD Dir Dir

04/19/23

28

Neighbor discovery

• How to know the direction of the intended node?

– CTS, DATA, ACK are much easier than RTS

– Two possible ways:

• From the AOA (Angle_of_Arrival ) of RTS and CTS.

• Or from self location information included in RTS and CTS.

– Directing the beam towards the destination for DRTS is challenging.

Possible solutions:

• Most MAC proposal assumes that this information is available by routing protocol. Each node know its location (by GPS or any location estimation method).

• By AoA cashing of overheard packets (ex. Takai et al.[2])

• Circular DRTS

• ORTS.

04/19/23

29

DMAC by Takai et al. [2]• Goals: send RTS directionally without location knowledge.• Employs DNAV

– It is set according to AoA of the RTS/CTS dialog

• Employs AoA cashing– The direction of neighbors is cashed based on the estimation of

AoA of the overheard packets.

• RTS is send directionally if the direction of the intended destination is available in the cash

• RTS is sent omnidirectionally if the direction of the destination is not available in the AoA cash or CTS is not received after directional RTS transmission.

• 3 to 4 times improvement in throughput compared to 802.1104/19/23

Neighbor discovery

30

• Extended transmission range– Beamforming enables longer range

– Advantages: reduced # of hops, e2e delays and better connectivity (sparse networks)

– Most of MAC proposals are not able to achieve the maximum possible range

• OO, OD link only,

– For Maximum range: • DD link

– MMAC by Choudhury et al. [3]

04/19/23

Neighbor discovery

31

MMAC by Choudhury et al. [3]- Knowledge of neighbors location is assumed

- Goal: improve system performance (e2e delay and throughput) by extending the range of transmission (DD link).

- Similar to basic DMAC + DD link- DD link can be established by multi-hop RTS (MHRTS)

D

B

A

C

E

DO Link

DD LinkMHRTS

DATA

MHRTS

MHRTS

DRTS

DCTS

04/19/23

Neighbor discovery

Multi Hop RTS – Basic Idea

A B

C

D E

F

G

DO neighbors

DD neighbors

A source-routes RTS to D through adjacent DO neighbors (i.e., A-B-C-D)

When D receives RTS, it beamforms towards A, forming a DD link

04/19/23 32

MMAC protocol

B

C

D E

F

G

H

A transmits RTS towards D

A

04/19/23 33

MMAC protocol

B

C

D E

F

G

H

DNAV

A

H updates DNAV

04/19/23 34

MMAC protocol

B

C

D E

F

G

H

A transmits M-RTS to DO neighbor B

A

04/19/23 35

MMAC protocol

C

D E

F

G

H

A

B forwards M-RTS to C (also DO)

B

04/19/23 36

MMAC protocol

B

C

D E

F

G

H

A beamforms toward D – waits for CTS

A

04/19/23 37

MMAC protocol

B

D E

F

G

H

A

C forwards M-RTS to D

C

04/19/23 38

MMAC protocol

B

E

F

G

H

C

A

D beamforms towards A – sends CTS

D

04/19/23 39

MMAC protocol

B

E

F

G

H

C

D

A

A & D communicate over DD link

04/19/23 40

MMAC protocol

B

E

FH

C

A

Nodes D and G similarly communicate

G

D

04/19/23 41

42

Problems in DMAC

There are two main problems associated with DMAC:

1. New Hidden Terminals

2. Deafness

04/19/23

43

Case 1. E is out of RTS/CTS range of

A/C communication

AC

E

A

E

D

The node is hidden to the ongoing communication of other node when it didn’t hear the RTS/CTS transmission while it can interfere

Case 2. Loss in channel state

D

C

Collision

Collision

The antenna of E is directed twards D

RTS/CTS of A/C CANNOT be heard by E

Problems in DMAC 1. New Hidden Terminals

04/19/23

44

• A node A is deaf with respect to nodes X, Z, if it cannot receive from nodes X, Z due to beam direction while it can receive if it was in omni mode.

• Effects:– Waste the capacity and energy (due unproductive control packets).

– Introduce unfairness (increased backoff interval).

RTS

RTS A BX

Z

DATA

X and Z do not know node A is busy. They keep transmitting RTSs to node A

Problems in DMAC2. Deafness

04/19/23

45

• Hidden terminals and deafness are the two critical problems in DMAC.

• Possible Solution:– Send RTS and/or CTS omnidirectionally while

DATA/ACK are sent directionally.

Example:

DMAC by Ko et al. [5]

Problems in DMAC

04/19/23

46

- Knowledge of neighbors location is assumed

- Multiple directional antennas for each nodes (switched beam)

- Goal: increase spatial reuse while reducing control packet collisions.

- DATA/ACK is directional

- CTS is omnidirectional = OCTS

- Two schemes for RTS:- Scheme 1 : DRTS (Directional RTS) only

- Scheme 2 : ORTS/DRTS

A

B

SD

X

S can send to D but not to X Both schemes send DRTS

DS

Scheme 2 sends RTS in all directions (ORTS) if no antenna is blocked

A

B

Problems in DMACDMAC by Ko et al. [5]

04/19/23

47

Performance • Offers about 50% better throughput compared to IEEE 802.11,

depends on Topology• Scheme 1 vs. Scheme 2:

– Scheme 2 tries to reduce collision of control packets at the source while scheme 1 tries maximize spatial reuse in the vicinity of the source.

– No significant performance difference

Problems in DMACDMAC by Ko et al. (Cont.)

04/19/23

48

Problems with DMAC

Possible Solution to unfairness caused by Deafness:

ToneDMAC by Choudury et al. [6]• Goal: to reduce the effect of unfairness caused by Deafness by

identify Deafness from congestion

• RTS/CTS/DATA/ACK are sent directionally

• After RTS/CTS/DATA/ACK exchange, A and B send their tones omnidirectinally.

• neighboring nodes that overhear the tones will know that node A or B was engaged in communication.

• Throughput is 2 times better than DMAC.

– Fairness is improved.

C will know that B was deaf. It will reset the backoff window to the minimum value.

A_TONE A B

CDATA

B_TONE

B_TONE

RTS

A_TONE

04/19/23

DMAC Tradeoffs

• Benefits

– Better Network Connectivity

– Spatial Reuse

• Disadvantages

– Hidden terminals

– Deafness

– No DD Links

04/19/23 49

Impact of Beamforming on Ad-hoc Networking:MAC , Neighbor discovery, Route discovery

Our Goal is to study the impact of Antenna beamforming on MAC.Examples: (Assume CSMA/CA )

Without beamforming With beamforming

A B C D A B C D

Exposed terminal problem No problem

A B A B

E

No problem Deafness Problem

C

D

E

C

D

04/19/23 50

51

Beamforming with power control

• Power control by it self can achieve higher performance

– Reduce interference

– Lower energy consumption

• Power control + beamforming can substantially improve the performance

No power control or beamforming

Area = A

r/2

r

Power control only

Area = A/4

r/2

Beamforming only

Area = A/6

Power control or beamforming

Area = A/144 !!!

A rough comparison of relative interference reduction, assuming 10 degrees directional beamwidth, and r 4 propagation. [1]04/19/23

Performance

• Simulation– Qualnet simulator 2.6.1– Constant Bit Rate (CBR) traffic– Packet Size – 512 Bytes– 802.11 transmission range = 250meters– DD transmission range = 900m approx– Beamwidth = 60 degrees– Channel bandwidth 2 Mbps– Mobility - none

04/19/23 52

MMAC Hop Count

• Max MMAC hop count = 3– Too many DO hops increases probability of failure of

RTS delivery– Too many DO hops typically not necessary to

establish DD link

A

B

C D E

F

G

DO neighbors

DD neighbors

04/19/23 53

MMAC - Concerns

• Neighbor discovery overheads may offset the advantages of MMAC

• High traffic – lower probability of RTS delivery• Multi-hop RTS may not reach DD neighbor due to deafness or collision•No more than 3 DO links is used for each DD link

04/19/23 54

Aligned Routes in Grid

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Sending Rate (Kbps)

Agg

rega

te T

hrou

ghpu

t (K

bps)

802.11DMACMMAC

04/19/23 55

Unaligned Routes in Grid

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Sending Rate (Kbps)

Agg

rega

te T

hrou

ghpu

t (K

bps)

802.11DMACMMAC

04/19/23 56

“Random” Topology

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Sending Rate (Kbps)

Agg

rega

te T

hrou

ghpu

t

802.11DMACMMAC

04/19/23 57

“Random” Topology: delay

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500

Sending Rate (Kbps)

Avg

. E

nd

to

En

d D

elay

(s)

DMAC

MMAC

04/19/23 58

• Nodes moving out of beam coverage in order of packet-transmission-time– Low probability

• Antenna handoff required– MAC layer can cache active antenna beam– On disconnection, scan over adjacent beams– Cache updates possible using promiscuous mode– Evaluated in [RoyChoudhury02_TechReport]

Mobility

04/19/23 59

Broadcast

• Several definitions of “broadcast”– Broadcast region may be a sector, multiple

sectors

– Omni broadcast may be performed through sweeping antenna over all directions [RoyChoudhury02_TechReport]

A

Broadcast Region

04/19/23 60

61

References

1. Basagni, M. Conti, S. Giordano, I. Stojmenovic, eds, Mobile Ad Hoc Networking, IEEE Press/Wiley, August 2004.

2. M. Takai, et al., “Directional virtual carrier sensing for directional antennas in mobile ad hoc networks”, ACM  MobiHoc 2002, pp 39-46, June 2002

3. R.R. Choudhury, X. Yang, N.H. Vaidya, and R. Ramanathan, “Using directional antennas for medium access control in ad hoc networks”, MOBICOM 2002, pp 59-70, September 2002

4. N.S. Fahmy, T.D. Todd and V. Kezys, “Ad hoc networks with smart antennas using IEEE 802.11-based protocols”, IEEE ICC 2002, pp 3144-3148, May 2002

5. Y-B Ko, V. Shankarkumar and N.H. Vaidya, “Medium access control protocols using directional antennas in ad hoc networks”, IEEE INFOCOM 2000, pp 13-21

6. Choudhury, R.R.and Vaidya, N.H., “Deafness: a MAC problem in ad hoc networks when using directional antennas” ICNP 2004, Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols, pp:283 - 292 , 2004