1. Multicasting in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Ravindra Vaishampayan Department of Computer Science University of California Santa Cruz, CA 95064, U.S.A. Advisor: Prof. J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves Dissertation Proposal

2. 2 Presentation Outline ● Background and Design Challenges ● Previous Work ● Our Contribution

3. 3 Mobile Ad Hoc Networks ● Formed on-demand without pre-existing infrastructure ● Multiple Wireless Hops

4. 4 Mobile Ad Hoc Networks ● Mobility results in topology and route changes Applications: Disaster relief, Battlefield, Policing, Search and Rescue etc.

5. 5 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multiple Unicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA J F E I H D G LK

6. 6 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multiple Unicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G J LK

7. 7 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multiple Unicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G J LK

8. 8 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multiple Unicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G J LK

9. 9 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multiple Unicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G J LK

10. 10 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multiple Unicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G J LK

11. 11 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multiple Unicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G J LK

12. 12 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multiple Unicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G Needs 8 Transmissions ! J LK

13. 13 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G J LK

14. 14 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G J LK

15. 15 Multicasting ● One to many communication : Multicasting S1 R1 R2 R3 CBA F E I H D G Needs just 3 Transmissions ! J LK

16. 16 Multicasting in Ad Hoc Networks ● Ad Hoc Networks cannot afford multiple unicasting as bandwidth is limited ● Most applications of ad hoc networks e.g. battlefield scenarios, search and rescue operations involve one to many communication ● Compared to multicasting in wired networks need to handle low link reliability, mobility, low battery life ● Can be classified as tree based or mesh based protocols

17. 17 Tree Based Multicasting R2R1R3A C B DEFG H K I S1L R3 O N R4P Q T S R5 U

18. 18 Tree Based Multicasting R2R1R3A C B DEFG H K I S1L R3 O N R4P Q T S R5 U

19. 19 Tree Based Multicasting R2R1R3A C B DEFG H K I S1L R3 O N R4P Q T S R5 U

20. 20 Tree Based Multicasting R2R1R3A C B DEFG H K I S1L R3 O N R4P Q T S R5 U ● Packets flow from sender to receiver along a single path. ● Exact shape of tree depends on protocol. E.g. shared vs source based

21. 21 Mesh Based Multicasting R2R1R3A C B DEFG H K I S1L R3 O N R4P Q T S R5 U ● Packets flow from sender to receiver along multiple paths. ● Due to multiple paths meshes are more tolerant of link breaks ● Higher packet delivery ratio but also higher overhead. ● Redundancy in mesh depends on protocol e.g. sender initiated vs receiver initiated.

22. 22 Design Challenges ● Protocol should handle mobility well ● Should have a low overhead because: ● Bandwidth is limited ● Overhead is related to battery power, also limited ● The above two objectives are often contradictory

23. Previous Work ODMRP Per sender control flood Sender initiated mesh construction may lead to wasteful transmissions MAODV Three step process for fixing links takes too long and adds to much overhead

24. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol

25. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders

26. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Assume R1, R2, R3 are receivers

27. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Assume R1, R2, R3 are receivers ● Each sender floods JOIN Requests which set up a reverse path from each sender to each receiver.

28. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Assume R1, R2, R3 are receivers ● Each sender floods JOIN Requests which set up a reverse path from each sender to each receiver. ● Receivers send out JOIN Tables along the reverse path to each sender.

29. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Assume R1, R2, R3 are receivers ● Each sender floods JOIN Requests which set up a reverse path from each sender to each receiver. ● Receivers send out JOIN Tables along the reverse path to each sender.

30. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Assume R1, R2, R3 are receivers ● Each sender floods JOIN Requests which set up a reverse path from each sender to each receiver. ● Receivers send out JOIN Tables along the reverse path to each sender.

31. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Assume R1, R2, R3 are receivers ● Each sender floods JOIN Requests which set up a reverse path from each sender to each receiver. ● Receivers send out JOIN Tables along the reverse path to each sender. ● Each node on a reverse path from sender to receiver defines the mesh

32. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 Drawbacks ● Per-source flooding leads to significant overhead

33. On Demand Multicast Routing Protocol (ODMRP) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 Drawbacks ● Per-source flooding leads to significant overhead ● Sender-initiated mesh results in large number of wasted transmissions e.g. Nodes N4-N8 and N12 transmitting packets from S3wasteful (Only provide connectivity to S1 and S2)

34. Multicast Ad hoc On demand Distance Vector (MAODV) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol

35. Multicast Ad hoc On demand Distance Vector (MAODV) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders

36. Multicast Ad hoc On demand Distance Vector (MAODV) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10 R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● First receiver joining the group becomes Group Leader, periodically broadcasting group-hello packets. Group Leader

37. Multicast Ad hoc On demand Distance Vector (MAODV) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10 R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● First receiver joining the group becomes Group Leader, periodically broadcasting group-hello packets. ● Additional receivers Join the tree based on a three step process : 1) RREQ 2) RREP 3) MACT Group Leader

38. Multicast Ad hoc On demand Distance Vector (MAODV) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10 R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● First receiver joining the group becomes Group Leader, periodically broadcasting group-hello packets. ● Additional receivers Join the tree based on a three step process : 1) RREQ 2) RREP 3) MACT ● Senders also acquire routes to the tree using 1) RREQ 2) RREP 3) MACT ● Data packets are forwarded over activated links. Group Leader

39. Multicast Ad hoc On demand Distance Vector (MAODV) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10 R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 Drawbacks ● Link Establishment / Link maintenance takes too long due to 3 steps, and has high overhead, leading to low PDR Group Leader

40. Our Contribution ROMANT : First tree based protocol to give PDR comparable to mesh based protocols. PUMA : Mesh based protocol with virtually fixed control overhead and high PDR Adaptive Mesh Based Multicast : Best of both worlds MODA : First protocol using DA’s increases transmission range for same energy consumption, reducing overhead. CLAMMP : First protocol to reduce interference by distributed channel scheduling so that communicating nodes are on the same channel and non-communicating nodes are on different channels.

41. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol

42. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders

43. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Like MAODV the first receiver joining the group is elected CORE of the group (highest ID wins if multiple join together) Core

44. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Tree Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Like MAODV the first receiver joining the group is elected core of the group (highest ID wins if multiple join together) ● Core periodically broadcasts a core announcement consisting of the following fields : ● Core ID ● Distance To Core = 0 ● Group ID ● Sequence Number Core

45. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Intermediate nodes forward fresh core announcements (based on seq number) after incrementing distance to core by 1 ● Core announcements allow each node to learn its distance to core and next hop towards core (Node reporting lowest distance to core) Core 2,N5 2,N9 2,N13 2,N142,N15 2,N10 2,N7 2,N52,N62,N7 1,R3 1

46. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Intermediate nodes forward fresh core announcements (based on seq number) after incrementing distance to core by 1 ● Core announcements allow each node to learn its distance to core and next hop towards core (Node reporting lowest distance to core) ● Receivers send join announcements address of group and address of next-hop ● Nodes receiving join announcements with their address as next-hop become tree members and also forward join announcements. Core 2,N5 2,N9 2,N13 2,N142,N15 2,N10 2,N7 2,N52,N62,N7 1,R3 1

47. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Senders send data packets towards next-hops ● Once data packets reach tree members they are flooded within the tree with a Packet ID cache used to drop duplicates. Core 2,N5 2,N9 2,N13 2,N142,N15 2,N10 2,N7 2,N52,N62,N7 1,R3 1

48. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Senders send data packets towards next-hops ● Once data packets reach tree members they are flooded within the tree with a Packet ID cache used to drop duplicates. ● Does not require 3 step route discovery as nodes already have next- hop information Core 2,N5 2,N9 2,N13 2,N142,N15 2,N10 2,N7 2,N52,N62,N7 1,R3 1

49. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Senders send data packets towards next-hops ● Once data packets reach tree members they are flooded within the tree with a Packet ID cache used to drop duplicates. ● Does not require 3 step route discovery as nodes already have next- hop information ● Fixing link breaks is quick e.g. if S2-N7 is broken S2 can send to N6, without a 3 step route discovery. Core 2,N5 2,N9 2,N13 2,N142,N15 2,N10 2,N7 2,N52,N62,N7 1,R3 1

50. RObust Multicasting in Ad hoc Networks using Trees (ROMANT) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Senders send data packets towards next-hops ● Once data packets reach tree members they are flooded within the tree with a Packet ID cache used to drop duplicates. ● Does not require 3 step route discovery as nodes already have next- hop information ● Fixing link breaks is quick e.g. if S2-N7 is broken S2 can send to N6, without a 3 step route discovery. Core 2,N5 2,N9 2,N13 2,N142,N15 2,N10 2,N7 2,N52,N62,N7 1,R3 1

51. ROMANT Simulation Environment Ex-1 : Mobility varied 0 – 20 m/s Ex-2 : Senders varied from 1-20 Ex-3 : Receivers varied from 5-40 Ex-4 : Traffic Load varied from 1-50 pkt/sec

52. Packet Delivery Ratio ExpROMANTODMRPMAODV Mobility0.977±0.0090.975±0.0080.792±0.282 Sender0.993±0.0030.872±0.1330.997±0.001 Receiver0.979±0.0040.978±0.0110.870±0.271 Traffic- Load 0.917±0.1570.886±0.1670.785±0.352

53. Control Overhead per node ExpROMANTODMRPMAODV Mobility335.4±8.91813.8 ±40.05003.7 ±6544.8 Sender333.5 ±0.62809 ±3006252.1 ±8.0 Receiver410.6 ±85.71879.5 ±921.03425.0 ±7098.5 Traffic- Load 326.6 ±14.61798.3 ±460.34098.5 ±6500.9

54. Total Overhead per node ExpROMANTODMRPMAODV Mobility1297.9±125.14088.7±131.16521.6±6083 Senders1128.5±12.24615.1±3574.62010.0±29.4 Receiver1168.9±263.83975.0±1325.94806.5±6987.1 Traffic- Load 1558.9±1231.04470.5±2924.85293.2±6985.5

55. ROMANT : Publications R. Vaishampayan and J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, "Robust Tree- based Multicasting in Ad-hoc Networks(ROMANT)", Workshop on Multihop Wireless Networks, 23 rd IEEE. International Performance Computing and Communications Conference, Phoenix, Arizona, April 14-17, 2004. R. Vaishampayan and J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, "Robust multicasting in ad hoc networks using trees", International Journal on Wireless and Mobile Computing(IJWMC)

56. Protocol for Unified Multicasting through Announcements (PUMA) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol

57. Protocol for Unified Multicasting through Announcements (PUMA) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders

58. Protocol for Unified Multicasting through Announcements (PUMA) S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Mesh Based Routing Protocol ● Assume S1, S2, S3 are senders ● Assume R1, R2, R3 are receivers and R3 is elected as core similar to ROMANT ● Cores in PUMA transmit a multicast announcement as opposed to a core announcement in ROMANT ● Multicast announcements have an additional field called mesh member flag Core

59. S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Receivers set mesh member flag to TRUE by default ● If a node has a neighbour which has member flag set and distance to core less than its own, then it considers itself a mesh member and sets mesh member flag to TRUE in its own multicast announcement. ● PUMA does not need a separate join announcement as in ROMANT. ● PUMA includes all shortest paths between each receiver and the core. Core 2 2 2 2 22222 2 2 2 2222 1 11 1 1 1 11 Protocol for Unified Multicasting through Announcements (PUMA)

60. S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 ● Data packets are sent towards the next-hops and flooded within the mesh as soon as they reach the first mesh member (Similar to ROMANT) Core 2 2 2 2 22222 2 2 2 2222 1 11 1 1 1 11 Protocol for Unified Multicasting through Announcements (PUMA)

61. S1 R2 N1S2N2N3 N7 N5 N6 N4 N10R3 N9 N12 R1 N8 N16N15N14 N17 N13 N11 S3N19N18 PUMA vs ODMRP ● Has only one flooding by the core, as opposed to ODMRP which has per source flooding ● Restricts redundancy where receivers exist thus reducing wasteful transmissions. Core 2 2 2 2 22222 2 2 2 2222 1 11 1 1 1 11 Protocol for Unified Multicasting through Announcements (PUMA)

62. Simulation Scenarios Simulation environment same as ROMANT. Experiments : Same as ROMANT + one where Multicast Groups varied from 1-10

63. Control Overhead per node ExpPUMAODMRPMAODV Mobility255.6±9.21813.8 ±40.05003.7 ±6544.8 Sender253.6 ±0.42809 ±3006252.1 ±8.0 Receiver250.6 ±4.41879.5 ±921.03425.0 ±7098.5 Traffic- Load 246.6 ±12.21798.3 ±460.34098.5 ±6500.9 Groups250.4 ±8.42062 ±14883237.9 ±5696.4

64. Packet Delivery Ratio ExpPUMAODMRPMAODV Mobility0.984±0.0080.975±0.0080.792±0.282 Sender0.988±0.0020.872±0.1330.997±0.001 Receiver0.986±0.0060.978±0.0110.870±0.271 Traffic- Load 0.917±0.1420.886±0.1670.785±0.352 Groups0.884±0.0150.605±0.2410.131±0.122

65. Total Overhead per node ExpPUMAODMRPMAODV Mobility2732.7±18.54088.7±131.16521.6±6083 Senders2718.9±12.84615.1±3574.62010.0±29.4 Receiver2518±7993975.0±1325.94806.5±6987.1 Traffic- Load 3260.2±32574470.5±2924.85293.2±6985.5 Groups5594±416.09336±2794.028542±7328.1

66. PUMA : Publications R. Vaishampayan and J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, "Protocol for Unified Multicasting through Announcements(PUMA)", 1st IEEE International Conference on Mobile Ad-hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS), Fort Lauderdale, Florida, October 24-27, 2004. R. Vaishampayan and J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, "Protocol for Unified Multicasting through Announcements(PUMA)", IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (Under review)

67. Motivation for Adaptive Protocols Mesh based protocols have higher overhead due to redundancy of path Traditionally Mesh based protocols had significantly higher PDR However ROMANT which is able to fix broken links quickly is provides comparable PDR to mesh based protocols, except for high mobility We need a protocol which can adapt redundancy depending on network conditions.

68. Adaptive Mesh Based Multicast 1 234 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 19 ● Adaptive Protocol which adapts redundancy in mesh depending on network conditions 21

69. Adaptive Mesh Based Multicast 1 234 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 19 ● Adaptive Protocol which adapts redundancy in mesh depending on network conditions ● Assume nodes 1, 8, 16, 17, 19, 20 are receivers, and node 8 is elected the core as in PUMA ● The core in “Adaptive” sends out multicast announcements like in PUMA ● In addition to the fields in PUMA multicast announcement has a field called parent 21 Core

70. Adaptive Mesh Based Multicast 1 234 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 19 ● Setting the parent field appropriately allows nodes to control the redundancy in the mesh ● Nodes become “mesh members” if they have a neighbour who has a) Mesh member flag set b) greater distance to core c) Parent field less than equal to node’s own ID ● Parent field determines number of parents included in mesh, hence mesh redundancy. ● E.g. Node 18 sets the parent field to 12, including parents 12, 14 but not 10 21 Core 4 8 8 15 8 8 8 6 12 13 11

71. Adaptive Mesh Based Multicast 1 234 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 19 ● Mesh Reliability Index ● MRI = % of implicit acks received ● If MRI < 0.92 then noOfParents++ ● If MRI > 0.95 then noOfParents-- ● 1<= noOfParents <= 3 21 Core 4 8 8 15 8 8 8 6 12 13 11

72. Adaptive Mesh Based Multicast ● Simulation environment : Same as ROMANT and PUMA Experiments : Ex-1 : Mobility varied 0 – 200 m/s Ex-2 : Senders varied from 1-20 Ex-3 : Receivers varied from 5-40 Ex-4 : Traffic Load varied from 1-50 pkt/sec Ex-5 : Multicast Groups varied from 1-10 Ex-6 : Terrain Size varied from 800m X 800m to 1600m X 1600m. Ex-7 : Same as Ex-1 except receivers 5 instead of 20 Ex-8 : Same as Ex-1 except receivers 10 instead of 20 Ex-9 : Same as Ex-1 except traffic load = 25 pkt/sec instead of 10 pkt/sec Ex-10 : Same as Ex-1 except traffic load = 50 pkt/sec instead of 10 pkt/sec Ex-11 : Same as Ex-1 except terrain-size = 1442m X 1442 m instead of 1000m X 1000m

73. Packet Delivery Ratio ProtocolPacket Delivery RatioStandard Deviation Adaptive0.830.15 V_10.780.16 V_All (PUMA) 0.860.15 ODMRP0.820.18

74. Average Packets Txed ProtocolAverage Packets Txed Per Node Per Experiment Adaptive3878.77 V_12683.66 V_All (PUMA) 6030.30 ODMRP9263.47

75. Adaptive Mesh Based Multicast : Publications R. Vaishampayan, J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves and Katia Obraczka, "An Adaptive Redundancy Protocol for Mesh Based Multicasting", 2005 International Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems (SPECTS '05). R. Vaishampayan, J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves and Katia Obraczka, "Redundancy adaptation based on link reliability in Mesh Based Multicasting", Computer Communications Journal.

76. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s)

77. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

78. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

79. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

80. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

81. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

82. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

83. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

84. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! ● Directional transmission will need only 3 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

85. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! ● Directional transmission will need only 3 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

86. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! ● Directional transmission will need only 3 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

87. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) MOTIVATION ● Principal overhead in state of the art protocols is data packet overhead (DPO) ● DPO can be reduced by transmitting packets over longer distances without increasing energy consumption using directional antennas’s (DA’s) ● Assume Node 7 is a sender and nodes 10, 1, 2, 3, 16 are receivers. ● Omnidirectional transmission will require 15 transmissions ! ● Directional transmission will need only 3 transmissions ! 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

88. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) CHALLENGES ● The main challenge is the exchange of location information so that nodes know in what direction to beam-form their antennas. ● To do the above without incurring too much overhead. 1 9 8 7 56 43 2 10 11 14 12 13 15 16

89. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) ● Involves two major steps a) omnidirectional tree construction and b) directional forwarding of data packets 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

90. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) ● Involves two major steps a) omnidirectional tree construction and b) directional forwarding of data packets OMNIDIRECTION TREE construction ● Assume nodes 9, 17, 22, 21, 12, 16, 1, 2 are receivers and node 6 is a sender 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

91. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) ● Involves two major steps a) omnidirectional tree construction and b) directional forwarding of data packets OMNIDIRECTION TREE construction ● Assume nodes 9, 17, 22, 21, 12, 16, 1, 2 are receivers and node 6 is a sender ● Core election similar to PUMA except receiver closest to centre of network elected as core, node 9 is elected as core ● Logically a tree is formed as every node chooses a parent and broadcasts it in the “parent” field of multicast announcement. 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

92. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) ● In addition to fields in a PUMA multicast announcement MODA also includes list of children, and locations of the node, its children and parent. ● Hence all nodes in PUMA have location info about their grandparents as well as grandchildren 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

93. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) Directional Data Packet Forwarding The main idea is that nodes transmit two hops instead of one whenever possible Nodes also do not retransmit if they realize that the packet has already reached the destination. 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

94. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) Directional Data Packet Forwarding The main idea is that nodes transmit two hops instead of one whenever possible Nodes also do not retransmit if they realize that the packet has already reached the destination. Node 8 does not retransmit as node 9 has already been reached. 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

95. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) Directional Data Packet Forwarding The main idea is that nodes transmit two hops instead of one whenever possible Nodes also do not retransmit if they realize that the packet has already reached the destination. Node 3 does not retransmit as node 1 has already been reached. 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

96. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) Directional Data Packet Forwarding The main idea is that nodes transmit two hops instead of one whenever possible Nodes also do not retransmit if they realize that the packet has already reached the destination. Node 11, 15 do not retransmit as nodes 12, 16 have already been reached. 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

97. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) Directional Data Packet Forwarding The main idea is that nodes transmit two hops instead of one whenever possible Nodes also do not retransmit if they realize that the packet has already reached the destination. Node 17 does have to retransmit the packet because nodes 21 and 22, have not yet received the packet. 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

98. Multicasting Over Directional Antennas (MODA) Directional Data Packet Forwarding The main idea is that nodes transmit two hops instead of one whenever possible Nodes also do not retransmit if they realize that the packet has already reached the destination. Node 20 does have to retransmit the packet because nodes 22 has already received it. 1 2 3 4 6 5 10 7 8 9 11 12 13 14 15 16 19 17 18 20 21 22

99. MODA Performance Evaluation Simulation Environment Same as ROMANT and PUMA (Omndirectional settings) Directional transmission performed with same energy level of omnidirectional transmission. Beamforming Angle : 45 degrees. Directional range : 2.45 x Omnidirectional Range Experiments Ex-1 : Mobility varied 0 – 20 m/s Ex-2 : Senders varied from 1-20 Ex-3 : Receivers varied from 5-40 Ex-4 : Traffic Load varied from 1-50 pkt/sec Ex-5 : Multicast Groups varied from 1-10.

100. MODA Performance Evaluation Simulation Environment Same as ROMANT and PUMA (Omndirectional settings) Directional transmission performed with same energy level of omnidirectional transmission. Beamforming Angle : 45 degrees. Directional range : 2.45 x Omnidirectional Range Experiments Ex-1 : Mobility varied 0 – 20 m/s Ex-2 : Senders varied from 1-20 Ex-3 : Receivers varied from 5-40 Ex-4 : Traffic Load varied from 1-50 pkt/sec Ex-5 : Multicast Groups varied from 1-10.

101. MODA Performance Evaluation Pkt Delivery Ratio Total Packets Txed Data Packets Txed Control Packets Txed MODA0.88 ± 0.08 81191 ± 49708 66262 ± 49610 14928 ± 4438 PUMA (tree-mode) 0.90 ± 0.08 119591 ± 74714 106770 ± 74627 12820 ± 637 ODMRP0.87± 0.18 510246 ± 296635 233690 ± 131442 276555 ± 252414

102. MODA Publications R. Vaishampayan, J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves and Katia Obraczka, "Multicasting Over Directional Antennas(MODA)", 2nd IEEE International Conference on Mobile Ad-hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS 2005).

103. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Motivation Capacity improvement is important in MANET’s due to limited bandwidth. 802.11a offers 13 orthogonal channels Communication can occur simultaneously if communication occurs on orthogonal channels

104. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Motivation Capacity improvement is important in MANET’s due to limited bandwidth. 802.11a offers 13 orthogonal channels Communication can occur simultaneously if communication occurs on orthogonal channels Assume nodes 1-11 are portions of three independent multicast trees, and are all in each others range If all three trees operate on orthogonal channels then simultaneous data transmission is possible on all trees. 2 10 8 7 65 4 3 9 1 11

105. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Design Challenges Nodes interested in exchanging data should be on the same channel most of the time. Nodes not exchanging data should be on different channels most of the time Synchronization algorithm should be efficient (in terms of time as well as bandwidth) Should adapt quickly to changes in traffic patterns (due to mobility and joining/leaving groups).

106. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Design Challenges Nodes interested in exchanging data should be on the same channel most of the time. Nodes not exchanging data should be on different channels most of the time Synchronization algorithm should be efficient (in terms of time as well as bandwidth) Should adapt quickly to changes in traffic patterns (due to mobility and joining/leaving groups). Reduce shared nodes as they reduce total capacity (Node 5 cannot be on different channels at the same time) 10 5 4 3 9 1

107. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Two layer protocol composed of CLAMMP-Routing / CLAMMP MAC. C LAMMP-Routing Tree based protocol based on PUMA Builds trees so as to minimize number of shared nodes across multicast trees. Forwards/receives data/control packets to/from CLAMMP-MAC CLAMMP-Routing CLAMMP-MAC Transport Layer Physical layer

108. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) C LAMMP-MAC Time is split into equal size chunks called “slots” Nodes have a channel-hopping schedule across slots. Nodes try to match channel-hopping schedule with nodes they want to exchange data.

109. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) C LAMMP-MAC Time is split into equal size chunks called “slots” Nodes have a channel-hopping schedule across slots. Nodes try to match channel-hopping schedule with nodes they want to exchange data. Let no. of orthogonal channels = n, numbered 0 … n-1. Channel hopping schedules are represented by a (channel, seed) pair. new channel = (old channel + seed) mod n

110. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) C LAMMP-MAC Time is split into equal size chunks called “slots” Nodes have a channel-hopping schedule across slots. Nodes try to match channel-hopping schedule with nodes they want to exchange data. Let no. of orthogonal channels = n, numbered 0 … n-1. Channel hopping schedules are represented by a (channel, seed) pair. new channel = (old channel + seed) mod n E.g. n = 13, channel seed pair = (8, 4) Overall schedule is represented by 4 channel seed pairs.

111. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) C LAMMP-MAC Time is split into equal size chunks called “slots” Nodes have a channel-hopping schedule across slots. Nodes try to match channel-hopping schedule with nodes they want to exchange data. Let no. of orthogonal channels = n, numbered 0 … n-1. Channel hopping schedules are represented by a (channel, seed) pair. new channel = (old channel + seed) mod n E.g. n = 13, channel seed pair = (8, 4) Overall schedule is generally represented by 4 channel seed pairs. Schedule 1 : (8, 4) = 8,12,3,7,11,2,6,10,1,5,9,0,4,8 …. Schedule 2 : (9, 7) = 9,3,10,4,11,5,12,6,0,7,1,8,2,9 … Schedule 3 : (3,10) = 3,0,10,7,4,1,11,8,5,2,12,9,6,3 … Schedule 4 : (4, 6) = 4,10,3,9,2,8,1,7,0,6,12,5,11,4 … Overall schedule = 8, 9, 3, 4, 12, 3, 0, 10, 3, 10, 10, 3, 7, 4, 7, 9, 11, 11, 4, 2 …

112. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Channel seed pair properties If the channel, seed pair is the same the schedule is always the same If channel, seed pairs are different then they share a channel once in an iteration.

113. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Channel seed pair properties If the channel, seed pair is the same the schedule is always the same If channel, seed pairs are different then they share a channel once in an iteration. Channel seed pair selection Core’s randomly select 4 channel, seed pairs As far as possible select nodes select same channel seed pairs as parents.

114. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Channel seed pair properties If the channel, seed pair is the same the schedule is always the same. If channel, seed pairs are different then they share a channel once in an iteration. Channel seed pair selection Core’s randomly select 4 channel, seed pairs As far as possible select nodes select same channel seed pairs as parents. Nodes 1, 3, 4, 5 are always on the same channel, and nodes 2, 6, 7, 8 are always on the same channel. Nodes 5, 6 are on the same channel once in 13 slots (enough for exchanging multicast announcements) 2 8 7 65 4 3 1

115. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Shared Nodes CLAMMP-Routing tries to minimize the number of nodes which are part of multiple multicast trees e.g. node 5 However when such nodes exist they partially synchronize with each parent Nodes like node 5 are throughput bottlenecks as their throughputs are split between multiple groups. 10 5 4 3 9 1 [ A B C D ] [A F C H] [ E F G H ]

116. Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol (CLAMMP) Desynchronization Different stores randomly choosing the same channel seed pair on a particular SLOT, though rare is possible. Nodes detecting the same channel, seed pair pick a new one and broadcast it to the entire tree. (If a pair of nodes detect a collision on an even slot then the lower ID desynchronizes, otherwise the higher ID desynchronizes). Nodes 5 and 6 detect collisions on SLOT’s 2 and 3. 5 picks a new channel seed pair for position 2, and 6 picks a new channel seed pair for position 3, which is broadcast in their respective trees. 10 5 4 3 9 1 [ A B C D ] 6 [ E B C H ] [ A B C D ] [ E B C H ] [ A X C D ] [ E B Y H ]

117. CLAMMP – Simulation Environment

118. CLAMMP – Experiments Ex-1 : Multicast groups varied from 1 – 20. Ex-2 : Nodes varied from 50-200. (20 groups) Ex-3 : Receivers varied from 5-30 per group (10 groups) Ex-4 : Mobility varied from 0-20 m/s. (10 groups) Ex-5 : Senders varied from 1-20 per group (10 groups)

119. CLAMMP – Results : Throughput (Mbps) GroupsCLAMMPPUMAODMRP 11.02 1.07 55.084.703.08 1010.056.283.35 1514.757.103.50 2018.617.753.57

120. CLAMMP – Results : Packet Delivery Ratio Nodes50100150200 CLAMMP86.1688.5190.1791.03 PUMA35.8835.9936.0934.22 ODMRP16.5316.1915.8615.50

121. CLAMMP – Results : Packet Delivery Ratio Receivers per group 5102030 CLAMMP93.1592.8593.0692.91 PUMA57.7757.1258.1558.17 ODMRP30.4529.8831.0132.55

122. CLAMMP – Results : Packet Delivery Ratio Mobility05101520 CLAMMP97.7993.0690.8388.6785.43 PUMA59.7358.1557.2355.9755.22 ODMRP31.4531.0131.0730.8730.56

123. CLAMMP – Results : Packet Delivery Ratio Senders per group 15101520 CLAMMP93.6992.8491.9891.2990.47 PUMA58.7558.0557.4456.8356.22 ODMRP56.4531.0121.0713.878.92

124. CLAMMP Publications R. Vaishampayan, J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves and Katia Obraczka, "Cross Layer Ad hoc Multiple channel Multicasting Protocol(CLAMMP)", The Seventh ACM International Symposium onMobile Ad Hoc Networking and Computing (Mobihoc 2006), Under Review.

125. Conclusions ROMANT : First tree based protocol to give PDR comparable to mesh based protocols PUMA : Mesh based protocol with virtually fixed control overhead and high PDR Adaptive Mesh Based Multicast : Best of both worlds MODA : Using DA’s increases transmission range for same energy consumption. Reduces overhead. Overhead 0.68 times tree based PUMA and 0.16 times ODMRP CLAMMP : Reduce interference by distributed channel scheduling so that communicating nodes are on the same channel and non-communicating nodes are on different channels. Throughput increase by a factor of 3 compared to PUMA and 5 compared to ODMRP.

126. Thank You !