PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS OF MULTI-HOP WIRELESS NETWORKS A thesis submitted to Kent State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science by Hassan Hadi Latheeth AL-Maksousy December 2012 Thesis written by Hassan Hadi Latheeth AL-Maksousy B.S., Al-Mustansiriya University, 2006 Approved by Dr. Hassan Peyravi , Chair, Master Thesis Committee Dr. Javed Khan , Members, Master Thesis Committee Dr. Feodor F. Dragan Accepted by Dr. Javed Khan , Chair, Department of Computer Science Dr. Raymond A. Craig , Associate Dean, College of Arts and Sciences ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES . vii LIST OF TABLES . viii Acknowledgements . ix 1 Introduction . 1 1.1 Multi-hop Wireless Networks . 2 1.2 Issues and Difficulties . 3 1.2.1 Unpredictable Link Properties . 5 1.2.2 Node Mobility . 5 1.2.3 Limited Battery Life . 6 1.2.4 Hidden and Exposed Terminal Problems . 6 1.2.5 Route Maintenance . 7 1.2.6 Security . 8 1.3 Multi-hop Wireless Network Protocols . 8 2 Previous and Current Work . 9 2.1 IEEE 802.11s: Mesh Networks . 9 2.1.1 Approaches to Wireless Mesh . 12 iii 2.1.2 The Single Radio Approach (Everything on the Same Channel) 12 2.1.3 The Dual Radio Approach (Sharing the Backhaul) . 13 2.1.4 The Multi Radio Approach (A Structured Wireless Mesh) . 13 2.1.5 Physical Layer . 14 2.1.6 Frame Structure of IEEE 802.11s . 15 2.1.7 Mesh Coordinated Channel Access . 17 2.1.8 Routing . 18 2.1.9 Applications . 19 2.1.10 Issues . 20 2.2 IEEE 802.15.5 . 22 2.3 IEEE 802.16j . 24 2.3.1 Physical Layer . 25 2.3.2 OFDMA and SOFDMA . 27 2.3.3 Frame Structure of IEEE 802.16j . 28 2.3.3.1 Frame Structure for Transparent Relay . 28 2.3.3.2 Frame Structure for Non Transparent Relay . 29 2.3.4 MAC Layer . 29 2.3.5 Routing . 32 2.3.6 Issues . 32 2.3.7 QoS Scheduling . 34 2.4 Previous Work . 35 iv 2.4.1 Throughput . 36 2.4.2 End-to-End Delay . 36 2.4.3 Fairness . 37 3 Multi-hop Wireless Network Performance . 39 3.1 Bandwidth Degradation . 39 3.2 Radio Frequency Interference . 40 3.3 Network Latency . 41 3.4 Fairness Provisioning Technique . 43 3.4.1 Background on Fairness . 43 3.4.2 Jain Fairness Index . 44 3.4.3 Max-Min Fairness . 44 3.4.4 Proportional Fairness . 45 4 The Simulator . 46 4.1 Software . 46 4.2 QualNet Architecture . 48 4.3 Models . 51 4.3.1 Nodes and Topology . 51 4.3.2 Applications . 52 4.3.2.1 Constant Bitrate . 52 4.3.2.2 File Transfer Protocol . 53 v 4.3.2.3 Source Traffic Model . 54 4.3.3 Protocols . 54 4.3.3.1 IEEE 802.11e . 55 4.3.3.2 IEEE 802.11s . 55 4.3.3.3 TDMA . 55 4.3.3.4 TDMA characteristics . 56 4.4 Simulation Parameters . 57 4.4.1 Duration . 57 4.4.2 QoS Metrics . 57 4.4.3 Physical Layer . 58 4.4.4 MAC Layer . 58 4.4.5 Network Layer . 59 5 Results . 60 6 Future Work and Conclusion . 65 6.1 Future Work . 65 6.2 Conclusion . 66 Glossary . 68 BIBLIOGRAPHY . 72 vi LIST OF FIGURES 1 Relay and mesh. 3 2 Hidden terminal. 6 3 Exposed terminal. 7 4 IEEE 802.11s frame structure . 16 5 IEEE 802.16j transparent frame structure. 29 6 IEEE 802.16j non-transparent frame structure. 30 7 Throughput degradation. 40 8 QualNet architecture. 46 9 (a) Linear, and (b) tree. 51 10 Throughput and normalized throughput. 60 11 Average throughput on varying topologies. 61 12 Fairness index of average end-to-end delay on varying topologies. 61 13 Average end-to-end delay per node on varying topologies. 62 14 Average end-to-end delay per node on varying topologies. 63 15 Average throughput and Jain fairness index for varying protocols. 63 16 Average end-to-end delay and Jain fairness index for varying protocols. 63 17 Controlling rate for better fairness. 64 vii LIST OF TABLES 1 Scenario input data. 52 viii Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my adviser Dr. Hassan Peyravi for all of his guidance, support, and advice. He has broadened my knowledge and helped me to become a better researcher. I was truly fortunate to have him as my adviser. I would also like to thank the committee members Dr. Javed Khan and Dr. Feodor F. Dragan for the valuable comments and suggestions they have offered me. Their feedback has improved the quality of this thesis. I am so thankful for my parents. I am thankful for their unconditional love and for raising me the right way, making me the person I am today. Finally, I would like to thank the Kent community at large and especially the department of Computer Science. I would like to extend a special thanks to Marcy Curtiss, the gradute secretary. They have all made me feel welcome and have sur- rounded me with the warmth of a family. Kent State University will always have a special place in my heart. ix CHAPTER 1 Introduction Broadband access to the Internet has become necessary in all of todays networks to support high quality multimedia services, such as video, voice, high definition TV or interactive games. Network communications with end devices are becoming increasingly wireless. Many standards for wireless networking are now taking the next step to support mesh architectures in which data is commonly forwarded on paths consisting of multiple wireless hops. These multi-hop network architectures have great flexibilities, however it will be shown that they suffer from a performance limitation. There is a significant body of the literature addressing the fairness problem with respect to throughput and delay performance in multi-hop wireless networks. How- ever, none has shown the impact of other important factors such as network topology, level of aggregation, and source traffic models. In this thesis, we study the effect of these important factors under normal and extreme conditions and show major limita- tions in terms of hop counts, traffic load and contention domain in terms of horizontal (spread) and vertical (hop count) contentions. The result show that supporting de- lay and throughput sensitive applications require careful deployment of the underling 1 2 relay nodes. 1.1 Multi-hop Wireless Networks Multi-hop wireless networks (MWNs) are being used as alternative solutions to the wired back-haul links. They are similar to the mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs), but differ in terms of mobility, topology, and architecture. Nodes in MWNs are relatively fixed with relatively robust connectivity and often follow a hierarchical architecture. MWNs can be classified into relay architecture, where nodes form a sink tree, or mesh topology, in which multiple connections exists among mesh nodes. Most of wireless networks operate in high frequency bands above 2 GHz. However, at higher carrier frequency cell size needs to be decreased because of an increase in path loss [1] and increased power consumption. In order to conserver power, base stations (BSs) need to be placed closer together. Therefore more BSs are needed to achieve the same coverage. MWNs overcome these problems by extending ranges through increasing capacity and reduce power consumption through route diversity. A MWN can be arranged in one of two architectures: relay or mesh. The relay and mesh topologies have some of the same elements. They both have BSs and subscriber stations (SSs). The SSs are trying to connect with the BS, but each topology does this in a different way. In relay, the network infrastructure includes relay stations (RSs) that are mostly installed, owned and controlled by a service provider. A RS is not directly connected 3 to wire infrastructure and has the minimum functionality necessary to support multi- hop communication. The important aspect is that traffic always leads from or to a BS. SS to SS communication paths that do not include a BS are not considered. SSs may forward traffic to another SS, RS or BS, and can communicate directly with each other. Nodes are comprised of mesh routers and mesh clients. Therefore, the routing process is controlled not only by BSs but also by SSs. Each node can forward packets on behalf of other nodes that may not be within direct wireless transmission range of their destination. A system that has a direct connection to backhaul services outside the mesh network is termed a mesh BS. All the other systems are called a mesh SS [2]. So, every SS can be RS but not every RS can be a SS. BS RS RS SS SS SS BS Relay Mesh Figure 1: Relay and mesh. 1.2 Issues and Difficulties There are many benefits for using multi-hop technology such as rapid deployment with lower-cost back-haul, extend coverage due to multi-hop forwarding in hard-to- wire areas, enhanced throughput due to shorter hops and extended battery life due 4 to lower power transmission. [2] MWNs suffer from some drawbacks including: 1. Performance: MWNs do not match the performance of a wired network. 2. Routing complexity: These networks need path management which creates ex- tra delay due to multi-hop relaying. For example, we must also specify the maximum number of hops for each node which should not be exceeded, because more hops mean more transmission time. 3. Increased channel contention: When a packet follows a.