Page 2 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2865 Edited by G. Goos ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Analyzing Split Channel Medium Access Control Schemes 13710.90.8Throughput of MAC−1 and MAC−2R0.70.60.50.40.30.20.1L d=1024, S 1L d=1024, S 2RL d=1024, S 2R, simulationL d=2048, S 1L d=2048, S 2RL d=2048, S 2R, simulationL d=4096, S 1L d=4096, S 2RL d=4096, S 2R, simulation00 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5Ratio of control channel over entire channel, rFig. 5. Throughput comparisons between MAC-1 and MAC-2RIn Fig. 5, we compare the throughput performance of pure ALOHA-basedMAC-1 and MAC-2R schemes for different data packet lengths. The straight linesrepresent the throughput of the MAC-1 scheme. The throughput of the MAC-2R scheme increases as r increases until the throughput reaches the maximumachievable value and then degrades. When r is too small, the control subchannelneeds much longer time to come up with a successful RTS/CTS dialogue.However, when r is too large, the fraction of the entire available channel used totransmit data is too small, limiting the throughput of the MAC-2R scheme.Comparing the throughput performance of the MAC-1 and the MAC-2Rschemes, we observe that the MAC-1 scheme always out-performs the MAC-2Rscheme, due to the non-zero waiting time on the data subchannel in the MAC-2R scheme. As expected, the throughput increases as L d (or k) becomes larger,approaching 1 as L d (or k) increases. In the same figure, Fig. 5, we also draw thesimulation results of the MAC-2R scheme, demonstrating that our simulationresults closely match those obtained by our analysis.In Fig. 6, we show the ratio of the throughputs of the MAC-2R and the MAC-1 scheme, S 2R /S 1 , as a function of r for different data packet lengths L d .Itcanbe observed that the maximum achievable throughput of the MAC-2R schemeis closer to the throughput of the corresponding MAC-1 scheme as L d increases.Thus, the penalty for splitting the single channel is lower when data packetlength is larger. As L d increases, the optimum r that achieves the maximumthroughput for the MAC-2R scheme becomes smaller.In Fig. 6, we also draw symbols representing the performance of the MAC-2R scheme, when the single channel is split according to the expected value ofthe contention resolution periods. In these cases, r is set to r ∗ = w+2w+2+k ,asshown in (8). As shown in the figure, the throughput of the MAC-2R schemes isoffset from the optimum operation point of the MAC-2R scheme. Interestingly,we find that such a non-optimum scheme would operate at the same relativeperformance S 2R /S 1 for the different values of L d , as the three symbols are all
138 J. Deng, Y.S. Han, and Z.J. HaasThroughput Comparison of MAC−1 and MAC−2R, S 2R/S 110.90.80.70.60.50.40.30.20.1L d=1024L d=2048L d=409600 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5Ratio of control channel over entire channel, rFig. 6. Throughput comparisons between MAC-1 and MAC-2Rat 0.78 4 . When the MAC-2R scheme is optimized according to the expectedvalue of the contention resolution periods, i.e., setting r to r ∗ , we conclude thatthe throughput degradation of the MAC-2R scheme over the MAC-1 scheme canbe as high as 22%.5 ConclusionsIn wireless communication networks, the Medium Access Control (MAC) schemecan significantly affect the performance of the network system. To improve thethroughput performance of MAC schemes on random access channels, some researchersproposed to split the single shared channel into two subchannels: a controlsubchannel and a data subchannel. Control packets are sent on the controlsubchannel, while the data subchannel is used solely to transmit data packets.Therefore, separation of control packet transmission and data packet transmissionis achieved.Some previous publications in the literature claimed that the split-channelMAC scheme may achieve the same or better throughput as the correspondingsingle-channel MAC scheme does. However, as we show in this paper, theseoptimistic results were derived by considering only the expected value of the contentionresolution periods, without taking into the account the random distributionof these periods. When the randomness of the contention resolution periodsis considered, the split-channel schemes are inferior to the single-channel schemein fully-connected networks and for the scenarios that we have studied here. Accordingto our analysis, this result holds even if the split-channel schemes areoptimized with respect to the ratio of the bandwidth of the control subchannelto the bandwidth of the entire channel.[( ) ]∣4In fact, when r = r ∗ = w+2w+2+k , S 12R/S 1 = 1/1−r + w2 k ∣∣r=rkr w+2+k=∗( )1/ 1+ w2w+2. Since δ = w + 2 and it is not related to k, w 2 is not related tok according to (6). Therefore, the ratio S 2R /S 1 is not related to k.
Page 2 and 3:
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2
Page 4 and 5:
Samuel Pierre Michel BarbeauEvangel
Page 6:
PrefaceAd Hoc Networks are wireless
Page 9 and 10:
Program CommitteeG. Alonso, ETHZ, S
Page 11 and 12:
XTable of ContentsResisting Malicio
Page 13 and 14:
2 H. Dubois-Ferrière, M. Grossglau
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
10 H. Dubois-Ferrière, M. Grossgla
Page 23 and 24:
SAFAR: An Adaptive Bandwidth-Effici
Page 25 and 26:
14 J. Doshi and P. Kilambiour proto
Page 27 and 28:
16 J. Doshi and P. Kilambipacket th
Page 29 and 30:
18 J. Doshi and P. Kilambibandwidth
Page 31 and 32:
20 J. Doshi and P. Kilambi5 Simulat
Page 33 and 34:
22 J. Doshi and P. Kilambiquery its
Page 35 and 36:
24 J. Doshi and P. Kilambi4. David
Page 37 and 38:
26 P. Narayan and V.R. SyrotiukThe
Page 39 and 40:
28 P. Narayan and V.R. Syrotiuk2.2
Page 41 and 42:
30 P. Narayan and V.R. Syrotiukrand
Page 43 and 44:
32 P. Narayan and V.R. Syrotiukenti
Page 45 and 46:
34 P. Narayan and V.R. SyrotiukDSRA
Page 47 and 48:
36 P. Narayan and V.R. Syrotiuk7. A
Page 49 and 50:
38 L. Qin and T. Kunzthese two prot
Page 51 and 52:
40 L. Qin and T. Kunzsidered broken
Page 53:
42 L. Qin and T. KunzP = Prdlog( )
Page 57 and 58:
46 L. Qin and T. KunzFig. 5. Averag
Page 59 and 60:
48 L. Qin and T. Kunz6. J. Broch et
Page 61 and 62:
50 M. Diha and S. Pierrethe propose
Page 63 and 64:
52 M. Diha and S. Pierre3. All proc
Page 65 and 66:
54 M. Diha and S. Pierre3.3 Perform
Page 67 and 68:
56 M. Diha and S. PierreCmip/Cprop0
Page 69 and 70:
58 M. Diha and S. PierreThe tunneli
Page 71 and 72:
Proactive QoS Routing in Ad Hoc Net
Page 73 and 74:
62 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. LamontFig
Page 75 and 76:
64 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. Lamontits
Page 77 and 78:
66 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. Lamonttha
Page 79 and 80:
68 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. Lamontwhi
Page 81 and 82:
70 Y. Ge, T. Kunz, and L. Lamontver
Page 83 and 84:
Delivering Messagesin Disconnected
Page 85 and 86:
74 R. Shah and N.C. Hutchinson3.1 T
Page 87 and 88:
76 R. Shah and N.C. Hutchinsonset c
Page 89 and 90:
78 R. Shah and N.C. HutchinsonTable
Page 91 and 92:
80 R. Shah and N.C. HutchinsonOracl
Page 93 and 94:
82 R. Shah and N.C. Hutchinsonthe r
Page 95 and 96:
Extending Seamless IP Multicast Edg
Page 97 and 98: 86 P.M. Ruiz et al.Section 4 presen
Page 99 and 100: 88 P.M. Ruiz et al.Access NetworkCo
Page 101 and 102: 90 P.M. Ruiz et al.Access NetworkR
Page 103 and 104: 92 P.M. Ruiz et al.MIGAccess Networ
Page 105 and 106: 94 P.M. Ruiz et al.10.90.81-hop-750
Page 107 and 108: A Uniform Continuum Model for Scali
Page 109 and 110: 98 E.W. Grundke and A.N. Zincir-Hey
Page 111 and 112: 100 E.W. Grundke and A.N. Zincir-He
Page 113 and 114: 102 E.W. Grundke and A.N. Zincir-He
Page 115 and 116: Probabilistic Protocols for Node Di
Page 117 and 118: 106 G. Alonso et al.A node discover
Page 119 and 120: 108 G. Alonso et al.frequency alloc
Page 121 and 122: 110 G. Alonso et al.- D is a diagon
Page 123 and 124: 112 G. Alonso et al.and therefore,
Page 125 and 126: 114 G. Alonso et al.complicated. Fo
Page 127 and 128: Towards Adaptive WLAN Frequency Man
Page 129 and 130: 118 F. Gamba, J.-F. Wagen, and D. R
Page 139 and 140: Analyzing Split Channel Medium Acce
Page 141 and 142: 130 J. Deng, Y.S. Han, and Z.J. Haa
Page 147: 136 J. Deng, Y.S. Han, and Z.J. Haa
Page 151 and 152: Preventing Replay Attacks for Secur
Page 153 and 154: 142 J. Zhen and S. SrinivasTraffic
Page 155 and 156: 144 J. Zhen and S. SrinivasFig. 2.
Page 157 and 158: 146 J. Zhen and S. Srinivasbeginnin
Page 159 and 160: 148 J. Zhen and S. Srinivasthe time
Page 161 and 162: 150 J. Zhen and S. Srinivas16. Y. H
Page 163 and 164: 152 M. Just, E. Kranakis, and T. Wa
Page 175 and 176: A New Framework for Building Secure
Page 177 and 178: 166 H.-P. Bischof, A. Kaminsky, and
Page 187 and 188: 176 G. Calinescuof the UDG 2-hops a
Page 189 and 190: 178 G. CalinescuSection 3 describe
Page 191 and 192: 180 G. CalinescuWhen receiving a pa
Page 193 and 194: 182 G. CalinescuRyvxFig. 3. The unn
Page 195 and 196: 184 G. Calinescu< nodeID, pieceID,
Page 197 and 198: 186 G. Calinescu7. Heinz Breu and D
Page 199 and 200:
188 S.O. Krumke et al.desirable in
Page 201 and 202:
190 S.O. Krumke et al.2.2 Bicriteri
Page 203 and 204:
192 S.O. Krumke et al.1. From the g
Page 205 and 206:
194 S.O. Krumke et al.The following
Page 207 and 208:
196 S.O. Krumke et al.1. Let α =6l
Page 209 and 210:
198 S.O. Krumke et al.for any given
Page 211 and 212:
200 S. PatilIDEA uses the concept o
Page 213 and 214:
202 S. PatilAfter flooding the quer
Page 215 and 216:
204 S. Patil5 Simulation ModelSourc
Page 217 and 218:
206 S. PatilAvg. Aggregate Energy C
Page 219 and 220:
208 S. PatilTable 1. Probability of
Page 221 and 222:
210 S. Patilergy consumption of the
Page 223 and 224:
212 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidisenergy
Page 225 and 226:
214 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidisaim at
Page 227 and 228:
216 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidis12: end
Page 229 and 230:
218 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidis1.8E+09
Page 231 and 232:
220 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidis2.0E+10
Page 233 and 234:
222 T. Chu and I. Nikolaidisattack
Page 235 and 236:
224 F.J. Molina, J. Barbancho, and
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
236 G. Calinescu and P.-J. Wan3.5 4
Page 249 and 250:
238 G. Calinescu and P.-J. Wanmum s
Page 251 and 252:
240 G. Calinescu and P.-J. WanFrom
Page 253 and 254:
242 G. Calinescu and P.-J. Wan5 Alg
Page 255 and 256:
244 G. Calinescu and P.-J. WanThe n
Page 257 and 258:
246 G. Calinescu and P.-J. Wan9. A.
Page 259 and 260:
248 C.J. Colbourn, V.R. Syrotiuk, a
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
260 S. Bhadra and A. Ferreirathe mo
Page 273 and 274:
262 S. Bhadra and A. FerreiraIn thi
Page 275 and 276:
264 S. Bhadra and A. FerreiraDefini
Page 277 and 278:
266 S. Bhadra and A. FerreiraThis s
Page 279 and 280:
268 S. Bhadra and A. FerreiraTheore
Page 281 and 282:
270 S. Bhadra and A. Ferreira4. T.
Page 283 and 284:
272 M.K. Denko and Q.H. MahmoudAn i
Page 285 and 286:
274 M.K. Denko and Q.H. Mahmoud3.1
Page 287 and 288:
276 M.K. Denko and Q.H. Mahmoud5. D
Page 289 and 290:
278 B. Macabéo, S. Pierre, and A.
Page 291 and 292:
280 B. Macabéo, S. Pierre, and A.
Page 293 and 294:
282 A. Benslimane and A. BachirIn [
Page 295 and 296:
284 A. Benslimane and A. BachirFig.
Page 297 and 298:
286 A. Benslimane and A. Bachir5 Co
Page 299 and 300:
288 L. Hughes, K. Shumon, and Y. Zh
Page 301 and 302:
Page 303 and 304:
Page 305 and 306:
3BerlinHeidelbergNew YorkHong KongL
Page 307 and 308:
Series EditorsGerhard Goos, Karlsru
Page 310 and 311:
Organizing CommitteeConference Co-c
Page 312 and 313:
Table of ContentsSpace-Time Routing
Page 314:
Author IndexAlonso, G. 104Bachir, A
show all

Page 2 Lecture Notes in Computer Science 2865 Edited by G. Goos ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?