You are on page 1of 7

Problems in Ad Hoc channel Access

Taufeeq Malik Lovely Professional University

AbstractIn this term paper , I am going to discuss in detail the various parameters related to An ad-hoc network. Ad-hoc network is a self-organized and distributed entity consisting of a number of mobile stations (MS) without the coordination of any centralized access point. Clustering is one of the fundamental problems in ad hoc networks. In this context, we describe a distributed clustering algorithm for multihop ad hoc networks. We first propose a randomized control channel broadcast access method to maximize the worst-case control channel efficiency, based on which a distributed clustering algorithm is proposed. Both theoretical analysis and simulations indicate that the proposed clustering algorithm takes much less time and overhead to cluster a given network with more stable cluster structure, while incurring very small maintenance overhead in a dynamic resulting from the mobility of the MS. Network. Three types of collision-free channel access protocols for ad-hoc networks are presented. These protocols are derived from a novel approach to contention resolution that allows each node to elect deterministically one or multiple winners for channel access in a given contention context (e.g., a timeslot), given the identifiers of its neighbors one and two hopsaway. The new protocols are shown to be fair and capable of achieving maximum utilization of the channel bandwidth.The delay and throughput characteristics of the contentionresolution algorithms are analyzed, and the performance of the three types of channel access protocols is studied by simulations

Introduction

In this term paper we are going to discuss about the

various problems faced in adhoc networks. Hidden Terminal Problem in which Two nodes transmit concurrently data to the same receiver which causes the collision between the nodes. It can be prevented by using control messages. Another problem faced in the ad-hoc network is Exposed node problem in which overhearing data transmission from neighboring nodes

take place. To overcome this problem we use separate control and data channels or directional antennas.there are many more problems faced in ad-hoc networks such as Receiver-Initiated MAC protocols in which receiver informs sender that it is ready to receive data but there are possibilities that no way of knowing for sure that sender has data to send.Other problem such as Sender- Initiated MAC protocols in which sender informs receiver it has data to send receiver confirms it is ready to receive but control messages: RTS-CTS.

Problems in Ad Hoc Channel Access Hidden Terminal Problem

This is a well-known problem found in contention- based protocols, such as pure ALOHA, slotted ALOHA, CSMA, IEEE 802.11, etc. Two nodes are said to be hidden from one another (out of signal range) when both attempt to send information to the same receiving node, resulting in a collision of data at the receiver node (see Figure 4.1).

Problems in Ad Hoc channel Access Taufeeq Malik Lovely Professional University Abstract — In this termFigure 4.1 ) . " id="pdf-obj-0-26" src="pdf-obj-0-26.jpg">
Solution Hidden Terminal Problem Figure 4.2. Using an RTS-CTS handshake to resolve hidden node problems ToFigure 4.2 illustrates the concept of the RTS-CTS approach. Shortcomings of the RTS-CTS Solution The RTS-CTS method is not a perfect solution to the hidden terminal problem. There will be cases when collisions occur and the RTS and CTS control messages are sent by different nodes. As shown in Figure 4.3 , node B is granting a CTS to the RTS sent by node A. However, this collides with the RTS sent by node D at node C. Node D is the hidden terminal from node B. Because node D does not receive the expected CTS from node C, it retransmits the RTS. When node A receives the CTS, it is not aware of any collision at node C and hence it proceeds with a data transmission to node B. Figure 4.3. The incompleteness of the RTS-CTS method. " id="pdf-obj-1-2" src="pdf-obj-1-2.jpg">
Solution Hidden Terminal Problem Figure 4.2. Using an RTS-CTS handshake to resolve hidden node problems ToFigure 4.2 illustrates the concept of the RTS-CTS approach. Shortcomings of the RTS-CTS Solution The RTS-CTS method is not a perfect solution to the hidden terminal problem. There will be cases when collisions occur and the RTS and CTS control messages are sent by different nodes. As shown in Figure 4.3 , node B is granting a CTS to the RTS sent by node A. However, this collides with the RTS sent by node D at node C. Node D is the hidden terminal from node B. Because node D does not receive the expected CTS from node C, it retransmits the RTS. When node A receives the CTS, it is not aware of any collision at node C and hence it proceeds with a data transmission to node B. Figure 4.3. The incompleteness of the RTS-CTS method. " id="pdf-obj-1-4" src="pdf-obj-1-4.jpg">

Solution Hidden Terminal Problem

Figure 4.2. Using an RTS-CTS handshake to resolve hidden node problems

To avoid collision, all of the receiver's neighboring nodes need to be informed that the channel will be occupied. This can be achieved by reserving the channel using control messages, that is, using a handshake protocol. An RTS (Request To Send) message can be used by a node to indicate its wish to transmit data. The receiving node can allow this transmission by sending a grant using the CTS (Clear To Send) message. Because of the broadcast nature of these messages, all neighbors of the sender and receiver will be informed that the medium will be busy, thus preventing them from transmitting and avoiding collision. Figure 4.2 illustrates the concept of the RTS-CTS approach.

Solution Hidden Terminal Problem Figure 4.2. Using an RTS-CTS handshake to resolve hidden node problems ToFigure 4.2 illustrates the concept of the RTS-CTS approach. Shortcomings of the RTS-CTS Solution The RTS-CTS method is not a perfect solution to the hidden terminal problem. There will be cases when collisions occur and the RTS and CTS control messages are sent by different nodes. As shown in Figure 4.3 , node B is granting a CTS to the RTS sent by node A. However, this collides with the RTS sent by node D at node C. Node D is the hidden terminal from node B. Because node D does not receive the expected CTS from node C, it retransmits the RTS. When node A receives the CTS, it is not aware of any collision at node C and hence it proceeds with a data transmission to node B. Figure 4.3. The incompleteness of the RTS-CTS method. " id="pdf-obj-1-14" src="pdf-obj-1-14.jpg">

Shortcomings

of

the

RTS-CTS

Solution

The RTS-CTS method is not a perfect solution to the hidden terminal problem. There will be cases when collisions occur and the RTS and CTS control

messages are sent by different nodes. As shown in

node

B is granting a CTS to

the RTS

sent by node A. However, this collides with the RTS sent by node D at node C. Node D is the hidden terminal from node B. Because node D does not

receive the expected CTS from node C, it

retransmits the RTS. When node A receives the CTS, it is not aware of any collision at node C and hence it proceeds with a data transmission to node

B.

Solution Hidden Terminal Problem Figure 4.2. Using an RTS-CTS handshake to resolve hidden node problems ToFigure 4.2 illustrates the concept of the RTS-CTS approach. Shortcomings of the RTS-CTS Solution The RTS-CTS method is not a perfect solution to the hidden terminal problem. There will be cases when collisions occur and the RTS and CTS control messages are sent by different nodes. As shown in Figure 4.3 , node B is granting a CTS to the RTS sent by node A. However, this collides with the RTS sent by node D at node C. Node D is the hidden terminal from node B. Because node D does not receive the expected CTS from node C, it retransmits the RTS. When node A receives the CTS, it is not aware of any collision at node C and hence it proceeds with a data transmission to node B. Figure 4.3. The incompleteness of the RTS-CTS method. " id="pdf-obj-1-47" src="pdf-obj-1-47.jpg">

Figure 4.3. The incompleteness of the RTS-CTS method.

Another problematic scenario occurs when multiple CTS messages are granted to different neighboring nodes, causing collisions. As shown in Figure 4.4, two nodes are sending RTS messages to different nodes at different points in time. Node A sends an RTS to node B. When node B is returning a CTS message back to node A, node C sends an RTS message to node B. Because node C cannot hear the CTS sent by node B while it is transmitting an RTS to node D, node C is unaware of the communication between nodes A and B. Node D proceeds to grant the CTS message to node C. Since both nodes A and C are granted transmission, a collision will occur when both start sending data.

Another problematic scenario occurs when multiple CTS messages are granted to different neighboring nodes, causing collisions.Figure 4.4 , two nodes are sending RTS messages to different nodes at different points in time. Node A sends an RTS to node B. When node B is returning a CTS message back to node A, node C sends an RTS message to node B. Because node C cannot hear the CTS sent by node B while it is transmitting an RTS to node D, node C is unaware of the communication between nodes A and B. Node D proceeds to grant the CTS message to node C. Since both nodes A and C are granted transmission, a collision will occur when both start sending data. Figure 4.4. Another illustration of the RTS-CTS problem. Exposed Node Problem Overhearing a data transmission from neighboring nodes can inhibit one node from transmitting to other nodes. This is known as the exposed node problem. An exposed node is a node in range of the transmitter, but out of range of the receiver. This is illustrate d Figure4.5 . Solution A solution to the exposed node problem is the use of separate control and data channels or the use of directional antennas. The former will be discussed in the PAMAS and DBTMA sections. Figure 4.6a shows that a mobile node using an omni-directional antenna can result in several surrounding nodes being "exposed," thus prohibiting them from communicating with other nodes. This lowers network availability and system throughput. Alternatively, if directional antennas are employed, this problem can be mitigated. As shown in Figure 4.6b , node C can continue communicating with the receiving palm pilot device without impacting the communication between nodes A and B. The directivity provides spatial and connectivity isolation not found in omni-directional antenna systems. Figure 4.6. Using a directional antenna to resolve the exposed node problem. " id="pdf-obj-2-7" src="pdf-obj-2-7.jpg">

Figure 4.4. Another illustration of the RTS-CTS problem.

Exposed Node Problem

Overhearing a data transmission from neighboring nodes can inhibit one node from transmitting to other nodes. This is known as the exposed node problem. An exposed node is a node in range of the transmitter, but out of range of the receiver. This is

illustratedFigure4.5.

Another problematic scenario occurs when multiple CTS messages are granted to different neighboring nodes, causing collisions.Figure 4.4 , two nodes are sending RTS messages to different nodes at different points in time. Node A sends an RTS to node B. When node B is returning a CTS message back to node A, node C sends an RTS message to node B. Because node C cannot hear the CTS sent by node B while it is transmitting an RTS to node D, node C is unaware of the communication between nodes A and B. Node D proceeds to grant the CTS message to node C. Since both nodes A and C are granted transmission, a collision will occur when both start sending data. Figure 4.4. Another illustration of the RTS-CTS problem. Exposed Node Problem Overhearing a data transmission from neighboring nodes can inhibit one node from transmitting to other nodes. This is known as the exposed node problem. An exposed node is a node in range of the transmitter, but out of range of the receiver. This is illustrate d Figure4.5 . Solution A solution to the exposed node problem is the use of separate control and data channels or the use of directional antennas. The former will be discussed in the PAMAS and DBTMA sections. Figure 4.6a shows that a mobile node using an omni-directional antenna can result in several surrounding nodes being "exposed," thus prohibiting them from communicating with other nodes. This lowers network availability and system throughput. Alternatively, if directional antennas are employed, this problem can be mitigated. As shown in Figure 4.6b , node C can continue communicating with the receiving palm pilot device without impacting the communication between nodes A and B. The directivity provides spatial and connectivity isolation not found in omni-directional antenna systems. Figure 4.6. Using a directional antenna to resolve the exposed node problem. " id="pdf-obj-2-20" src="pdf-obj-2-20.jpg">

Solution

A solution to the exposed node problem is the use of separate control and data channels or the use of directional antennas. The former will be discussed in the PAMAS and DBTMA sections. Figure 4.6a shows that a mobile node using an omni-directional antenna can result in several surrounding nodes being "exposed," thus prohibiting them from communicating with other nodes. This lowers network availability and system throughput. Alternatively, if directional antennas are employed, this problem can be mitigated. As shown in Figure 4.6b, node C can continue communicating with the receiving palm pilot device without impacting the communication between nodes A and B. The directivity provides spatial and connectivity isolation not found in omni-directional antenna systems.

Another problematic scenario occurs when multiple CTS messages are granted to different neighboring nodes, causing collisions.Figure 4.4 , two nodes are sending RTS messages to different nodes at different points in time. Node A sends an RTS to node B. When node B is returning a CTS message back to node A, node C sends an RTS message to node B. Because node C cannot hear the CTS sent by node B while it is transmitting an RTS to node D, node C is unaware of the communication between nodes A and B. Node D proceeds to grant the CTS message to node C. Since both nodes A and C are granted transmission, a collision will occur when both start sending data. Figure 4.4. Another illustration of the RTS-CTS problem. Exposed Node Problem Overhearing a data transmission from neighboring nodes can inhibit one node from transmitting to other nodes. This is known as the exposed node problem. An exposed node is a node in range of the transmitter, but out of range of the receiver. This is illustrate d Figure4.5 . Solution A solution to the exposed node problem is the use of separate control and data channels or the use of directional antennas. The former will be discussed in the PAMAS and DBTMA sections. Figure 4.6a shows that a mobile node using an omni-directional antenna can result in several surrounding nodes being "exposed," thus prohibiting them from communicating with other nodes. This lowers network availability and system throughput. Alternatively, if directional antennas are employed, this problem can be mitigated. As shown in Figure 4.6b , node C can continue communicating with the receiving palm pilot device without impacting the communication between nodes A and B. The directivity provides spatial and connectivity isolation not found in omni-directional antenna systems. Figure 4.6. Using a directional antenna to resolve the exposed node problem. " id="pdf-obj-2-31" src="pdf-obj-2-31.jpg">

Figure 4.6. Using a directional antenna to resolve the exposed node problem.

Receiver-Initiated MAC Protocols

While

a

MAC

protocol

can

be

categorized

as

synchronous or asynchronous in operation, it can

also be distinguished by who initiates a

communication request. As shown in Figure 4.7, the

receiver (node B) first

has to contact

the sender

(node A), informing the sender that

it

is

ready to

receive data.

This

is

a

form of polling,

as

the

receiver has no way of knowing for sure if the

sender indeed has data to send.

Receiver-Initiated MAC Protocols While a MAC protocol can be categorized as synchronous or asynchronous in operation,Figure 4.7 , the receiver (node B) first has to contact the sender (node A), informing the sender that it is ready to receive data. This is a form of polling, as the receiver has no way of knowing for sure if the sender indeed has data to send. This is also a passive form of initiation since the sender does not have to initiate a request. In addition, there is only one control message used, compared to the RTS-CTS approach. Sender-Initiated MAC Protocols willing to receive data from node A. If positive, it returns a CTS message to node A. Node A then subsequently proceeds to send data. Existing Ad Hoc MAC Protocols Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance (MACA) MACA was originally suggested by Phil Karn for amateur packet radio networks. MACA aims to create usable, ad hoc, single-frequency networks. MACA was proposed to resolve the hidden terminal and exposed node problems. It also has the ability to perform per-packet transmitter power control, which can increase the carrying capacity of a packet radio. Contrary to receiver-initiated MAC protocols, sender-initiated MAC protocols require the sender to initiate communications by informing the receiver that it has data to send. Examples of these sender- initiated protocols include MACA (Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance), MACAW (MACA with Acknowledgment), and FAMA (Floor Acquisition Multiple Access). As shown in Figure 4.8 , node A sends an explicit RTS message to node B (the receiver) to express its desire to communicate. Node B can then reply if it is As shown in Figure 4.9 , MACA uses a three-way handshake, RTS-CTS-Data. The sender first sends an RTS to the receiver to reserve the channel. This blocks the sender's neighboring nodes from transmitting. The receiver then sends a CTS to the sender to grant transmission. This results in blocking the receiver's neighboring nodes from transmitting, thereby avoiding collision. The sender can now proceed with data transmission. MACA has power control features incorporated. The key characteristic of MACA is that it inhibits a transmitter when a " id="pdf-obj-3-73" src="pdf-obj-3-73.jpg">

This is also a passive form of initiation since the sender does not have to initiate a request. In addition, there is only one control message used, compared to the RTS-CTS approach.

Sender-Initiated MAC Protocols

willing to receive data from node A. If positive, it returns a CTS message to node A. Node A then subsequently proceeds to send data.

Receiver-Initiated MAC Protocols While a MAC protocol can be categorized as synchronous or asynchronous in operation,Figure 4.7 , the receiver (node B) first has to contact the sender (node A), informing the sender that it is ready to receive data. This is a form of polling, as the receiver has no way of knowing for sure if the sender indeed has data to send. This is also a passive form of initiation since the sender does not have to initiate a request. In addition, there is only one control message used, compared to the RTS-CTS approach. Sender-Initiated MAC Protocols willing to receive data from node A. If positive, it returns a CTS message to node A. Node A then subsequently proceeds to send data. Existing Ad Hoc MAC Protocols Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance (MACA) MACA was originally suggested by Phil Karn for amateur packet radio networks. MACA aims to create usable, ad hoc, single-frequency networks. MACA was proposed to resolve the hidden terminal and exposed node problems. It also has the ability to perform per-packet transmitter power control, which can increase the carrying capacity of a packet radio. Contrary to receiver-initiated MAC protocols, sender-initiated MAC protocols require the sender to initiate communications by informing the receiver that it has data to send. Examples of these sender- initiated protocols include MACA (Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance), MACAW (MACA with Acknowledgment), and FAMA (Floor Acquisition Multiple Access). As shown in Figure 4.8 , node A sends an explicit RTS message to node B (the receiver) to express its desire to communicate. Node B can then reply if it is As shown in Figure 4.9 , MACA uses a three-way handshake, RTS-CTS-Data. The sender first sends an RTS to the receiver to reserve the channel. This blocks the sender's neighboring nodes from transmitting. The receiver then sends a CTS to the sender to grant transmission. This results in blocking the receiver's neighboring nodes from transmitting, thereby avoiding collision. The sender can now proceed with data transmission. MACA has power control features incorporated. The key characteristic of MACA is that it inhibits a transmitter when a " id="pdf-obj-3-81" src="pdf-obj-3-81.jpg">

Existing Ad Hoc MAC Protocols

Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance (MACA)

MACA was originally suggested by Phil Karn for amateur packet radio networks. MACA aims to create usable, ad hoc, single-frequency networks. MACA was proposed to resolve the hidden terminal and exposed node problems. It also has the ability to perform per-packet transmitter power control, which can increase the carrying capacity of a packet radio.

Contrary to receiver-initiated MAC protocols, sender-initiated MAC protocols require the sender to initiate communications by informing the receiver

that it has data to send. Examples of these sender- initiated protocols include MACA (Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance), MACAW (MACA with Acknowledgment), and FAMA (Floor Acquisition

Multiple

Access).

As shown in Figure 4.8, node A sends an explicit RTS message to node B (the receiver) to express its desire to communicate. Node B can then reply if it is

As shown in Figure 4.9, MACA uses a three-way handshake, RTS-CTS-Data. The sender first sends an RTS to the receiver to reserve the channel. This blocks the sender's neighboring nodes from transmitting. The receiver then sends a CTS to the sender to grant transmission. This results in blocking the receiver's neighboring nodes from transmitting, thereby avoiding collision. The sender can now proceed with data transmission. MACA has power control features incorporated. The key characteristic of MACA is that it inhibits a transmitter when a

CTS packet is overheard so as to temporarily limit power output when a CTS packet is overheard.

Figure 4.9. An illustration of the control
Figure
4.9.
An
illustration
of
the
control

handshake used in MACA

handshake, as shown in Figure 4.10. There is no RTS. Instead, the CTS message is renamed as RTR (Ready To Receive). In MACA-BI, a node cannot transmit data unless it has received an invitation from the receiver. Note that the receiver node does not necessarily know that the source has data to transmit. Hence, the receiver needs to predict if indeed the node has data to transmit to it. The timeliness of the invitation will, therefore, affect communication performance.

CTS packet is overheard so as to temporarily limit power output when a CTS packet isFigure 4.10 . There is no RTS. Instead, the CTS message is renamed as RTR (Ready To Receive). In MACA-BI, a node cannot transmit data unless it has received an invitation from the receiver. Note that the receiver node does not necessarily know that the source has data to transmit. Hence, the receiver needs to predict if indeed the node has data to transmit to it. The timeliness of the invitation will, therefore, affect communication performance. Figure 4.10. An illustration of MACA-BI control handshake. Collisions do occur in MACA, especially during the RTS-CTS phase. There is no carrier sensing in MACA. If two or more stations transmit an RTS concurrently, resulting in a collision, these stations will wait for a randomly chosen interval and try again, doubling the average interval on every attempt. The station that wins the competition will receive a CTS from its responder, thereby blocking other stations to allow the data communication session to proceed. MACA-BI (By Invitation) A shift from the classic three-way handshake MAC protocol is MACA-BI (By Invitation). Invented by Fabrizio Talucci, MACA-BI uses only a two-way The author suggested the estimation of packet queue length and arrival rate at the source to regulate the transmission of invitations. One possible way to accomplish this is to piggyback such information into each data packet so that the receiver is aware of the transmitter's backlog. Hence, for constant bit rate (CBR) traffic, the efficiency of MACA-BI will be high since the prediction scheme will work fine. However, for bursty traffic, MACA-BI performance will be no better than MACA. To enhance the communication performance of MACA-BI under non-stationary traffic situations, a node may still transmit an RTS if the transmitter's queue length or packet delay exceeds a certain acceptable threshold before an RTR is issued. " id="pdf-obj-4-13" src="pdf-obj-4-13.jpg">

Figure 4.10. An illustration of MACA-BI control handshake.

Collisions do occur in MACA, especially during the RTS-CTS phase. There is no carrier sensing in MACA. If two or more stations transmit an RTS concurrently, resulting in a collision, these stations will wait for a randomly chosen interval and try again, doubling the average interval on every attempt. The station that wins the competition will receive a CTS from its responder, thereby blocking other stations to allow the data communication session to proceed.

MACA-BI (By Invitation)

A shift from the classic three-way handshake MAC protocol is MACA-BI (By Invitation). Invented by Fabrizio Talucci, MACA-BI uses only a two-way

The author suggested the estimation of packet queue length and arrival rate at the source to regulate the transmission of invitations. One possible way to accomplish this is to piggyback such information into each data packet so that the receiver is aware of the transmitter's backlog. Hence, for constant bit rate (CBR) traffic, the efficiency of MACA-BI will be high since the prediction scheme will work fine. However, for bursty traffic, MACA-BI performance will be no better than MACA. To enhance the communication performance of MACA-BI under non-stationary traffic situations, a node may still transmit an RTS if the transmitter's queue length or packet delay exceeds a certain acceptable threshold before an RTR is issued.

Power-Aware

Multi-Access

Signaling (PAMAS)

Protocol with

The Power-Aware Multi-Access Protocol with Signalling for ad hoc networks (PAMAS)[17] is based on the MACA protocol with the addition of a separate signalling channel. RTS-CTS dialogue exchanges occur over this channel. PAMAS conserves battery power by selectively powering off nodes that are not actively transmitting or receiving packets.

Power-Aware Multi-Access Signaling (PAMAS) Protocol with The Power-Aware Multi-Access Protocol with Signalling for ad hoc networks[ 17 ] is based on the MACA protocol with the addition of a separate signalling channel. RTS-CTS dialogue exchanges occur over this channel. PAMAS conserves battery power by selectively powering off nodes that are not actively transmitting or receiving packets. Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access (DBTMA) The use of a busy tone [ 18 ] was first proposed by Professor Fouad Tobagi from Stanford University. He proposed Busy Tone Multiple Access (BTMA) to solve the hidden terminal problem. However, BTMA relies on a wireless last-hop network architecture, where a centralized base station serves multiple mobile hosts. When the base station is receiving packets from a specific mobile host, it sends out a busy tone signal to all other nodes within its radio cell. Hence, hidden terminals sense the busy tone and refrain from transmitting. (1) Figure 4.13. The principle of Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access (DBTMA). In PAMAS, nodes are required to shut themselves off if they are overhearing other transmissions not directed to them. In addition, each node makes an independent decision about whether to power off its transceiver. The conditions that force a node to power off include: a. If a node has no packets to transmit, it should power off if one of its neighboring nodes is transmitting. b. If a node has packets to transmit, but at least one of the neighboring nodes is transmitting and another is receiving, then it should power off its transceiver. In DBTMA (Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access) [ 19 ] [ 20 ] , two out-of-band busy tones are used to notify neighboring nodes of any on-going transmission. In addition, the single shared channel is further split into data and control channels. Data packets are sent over the data channel, while control packets (such as RTS and CTS) are sent over the control channel. Specifically, one busy tone signifies transmit busy, while another signifies receive busy. These two busy tones are spatially separated in frequency to avoid interference. " id="pdf-obj-5-16" src="pdf-obj-5-16.jpg">

Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access (DBTMA)

The use of a busy tone [18] was first proposed by Professor Fouad Tobagi from Stanford University. He proposed Busy Tone Multiple Access (BTMA) to solve the hidden terminal problem. However, BTMA relies on a wireless last-hop network architecture, where a centralized base station serves multiple mobile hosts. When the base station is receiving packets from a specific mobile host, it sends out a busy tone signal to all other nodes within its radio cell. Hence, hidden terminals sense the busy tone and refrain from transmitting.

Power-Aware Multi-Access Signaling (PAMAS) Protocol with The Power-Aware Multi-Access Protocol with Signalling for ad hoc networks[ 17 ] is based on the MACA protocol with the addition of a separate signalling channel. RTS-CTS dialogue exchanges occur over this channel. PAMAS conserves battery power by selectively powering off nodes that are not actively transmitting or receiving packets. Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access (DBTMA) The use of a busy tone [ 18 ] was first proposed by Professor Fouad Tobagi from Stanford University. He proposed Busy Tone Multiple Access (BTMA) to solve the hidden terminal problem. However, BTMA relies on a wireless last-hop network architecture, where a centralized base station serves multiple mobile hosts. When the base station is receiving packets from a specific mobile host, it sends out a busy tone signal to all other nodes within its radio cell. Hence, hidden terminals sense the busy tone and refrain from transmitting. (1) Figure 4.13. The principle of Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access (DBTMA). In PAMAS, nodes are required to shut themselves off if they are overhearing other transmissions not directed to them. In addition, each node makes an independent decision about whether to power off its transceiver. The conditions that force a node to power off include: a. If a node has no packets to transmit, it should power off if one of its neighboring nodes is transmitting. b. If a node has packets to transmit, but at least one of the neighboring nodes is transmitting and another is receiving, then it should power off its transceiver. In DBTMA (Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access) [ 19 ] [ 20 ] , two out-of-band busy tones are used to notify neighboring nodes of any on-going transmission. In addition, the single shared channel is further split into data and control channels. Data packets are sent over the data channel, while control packets (such as RTS and CTS) are sent over the control channel. Specifically, one busy tone signifies transmit busy, while another signifies receive busy. These two busy tones are spatially separated in frequency to avoid interference. " id="pdf-obj-5-26" src="pdf-obj-5-26.jpg">

(1) Figure 4.13. The principle of Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access (DBTMA).

In PAMAS, nodes are required to shut themselves off if they are overhearing other transmissions not directed to them. In addition, each node makes an independent decision about whether to power off its transceiver. The conditions that force a node to power off include:

  • a. If a node has no packets to transmit, it should power off if one of its neighboring nodes is transmitting.

  • b. If a node has packets to transmit, but at least one of the neighboring nodes is transmitting and another is receiving, then it should power off its transceiver.

In DBTMA (Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access)[19] [20], two out-of-band busy tones are used to notify neighboring nodes of any on-going transmission. In addition, the single shared channel is further split into data and control channels. Data packets are sent over the data channel, while control packets (such as RTS and CTS) are sent over the control channel. Specifically, one busy tone signifies transmit busy, while another signifies receive busy. These two busy tones are spatially separated in frequency to avoid interference.

Conclusion

Bibliography

We discussed main issues of MAC layer and Routing protocols of network layer. These two layers play most important role in improving the performance of MANET. The future is PERVASIVE MANET[12]. cross-layer policies is a very promising direction, which can be further explored. Cross-layering can tackle the traffic in better manner on ad hoc networks by sharing information from different layers . Moreover, information collected at a particular layer (e.g., a route failure) can be exploited by different layers to tune the protocol behavior. The

future of ad hoc networks is really appealing, giving the

vision of “anytime, anywhere” and cheap

communications. Before those imagined scenarios come true, huge amount of work is to be done in both research and implementation. At present, the general trend in MANET is toward mesh architecture and large scale. Improvement in bandwidth and capacity is required, which implies the need for a higher frequency and better spatial spectral reuse. Propagation, spectral reuse, and energy issues support a shift away from a single long wireless link (as in cellular) to a mesh of short links (as in ad hoc networks). Large scale ad hoc networks are another challenging issue in the near future which can be already foreseen. As the evolvement goes on, especially the need of dense deployment such as battlefield and sensor networks, the nodes in ad hoc networks will be smaller, cheaper, more capable, and come in all forms. In all, although the widespread deployment of ad hoc networks is still year away, the research in this field will continue being very active and imaginative. Future research makes it possible to Imagine a wireless mesh of rooftop-mounted ad hoc routers; an ad hoc network of cars for instant traffic and other information; sensors and robots forming a multimedia network that allows remote visualization and control; multiple airborne routers (from tiny robots to blimps) automatically providing

connectivity and capacity where needed like in a football game; in an ad hoc network of spacecraft around and in transit between the Earth and mars .These may seem like science fiction, but a lot of work is in Process seriously by the ad hoc research