Throughput of Networks With Large Propagation Delays

Propagation delays in underwater acoustic networks can be large as compared to the packet size. Conventional medium-access control (MAC) protocol design for such networks focuses on mitigation of the impact of propagation delay. Most proposed protocols to date achieve, at best, a throughput similar to that of the zero propagation delay scenario. In this paper, we systematically explore the possibility that propagation delays can be exploited to make throughput far exceed that of networks without propagation delay. Under the assumptions of the protocol model in a single collision domain for a half-duplex unicast network, we show that the upper bound of throughput in an N-node wireless network with propagation delay is N/2. We illustrate network geometries where this bound can be achieved and study transmission schedules that help achieve it. We show that for any network, the optimal schedule is periodic and present a computationally efficient algorithm to find good schedules. Finally, we show that N-node network geometries that achieve throughput close to the N/2 bound exist for any N and present a lower bound on achievable maximum throughput for bounded geometries. This paper chiefly endeavors to explore the impact and potential of nonzero propagation delays on network throughput. We believe that the novel observations in this paper could motivate further research into this area, especially random access networks with large propagation delay, with a fundamentally changed outlook on maximum achievable throughput. This could lead to novel scheduling and network configuration approaches with applications in underwater and satellite networks.

[1]  Bhaskar Krishnamachari,et al.  Understanding spatio-temporal uncertainty in medium access with ALOHA protocols , 2007, Underwater Networks.

[2]  Mehul Motani,et al.  A scheduling algorithm for wireless networks with large propagation delays , 2010, OCEANS'10 IEEE SYDNEY.

[3]  Syed Ali Jafar,et al.  Interference Alignment and Degrees of Freedom of the $K$-User Interference Channel , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[4]  Milica Stojanovic,et al.  Distance aware collision avoidance protocol for ad-hoc underwater acoustic sensor networks , 2007, IEEE Communications Letters.

[5]  S.A. Jafar,et al.  Degrees of Freedom of Wireless Networks - What a Difference Delay Makes , 2007, 2007 Conference Record of the Forty-First Asilomar Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers.

[6]  Leonardo Badia,et al.  An optimization framework for joint sensor deployment, link scheduling and routing in underwater sensor networks , 2007, MOCO.

[7]  Walid Dabbous,et al.  On TCP performance in a heterogeneous network: a survey , 2000, IEEE Commun. Mag..

[8]  Prasant Mohapatra,et al.  STUMP: Exploiting Position Diversity in the Staggered TDMA Underwater MAC Protocol , 2009, IEEE INFOCOM 2009.

[9]  Panganamala Ramana Kumar,et al.  RHEINISCH-WESTFÄLISCHE TECHNISCHE HOCHSCHULE AACHEN , 2001 .

[10]  Alberto Leon-Garcia,et al.  Communication Networks: Fundamental Concepts and Key Architectures , 1999 .

[11]  David Tse,et al.  Opportunistic beamforming using dumb antennas , 2002, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[12]  Yunghsiang Sam Han,et al.  Analyzing multi-channel medium access control schemes with ALOHA reservation , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communications.

[13]  Mehul Motani,et al.  A Bidirectional-Concurrent MAC Protocol With Packet Bursting for Underwater Acoustic Networks , 2013, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering.

[14]  R. Mathar,et al.  On spatial patterns of transmitter-receiver pairs that allow for interference alignment by delay , 2009, 2009 3rd International Conference on Signal Processing and Communication Systems.

[15]  Gerhard Bauch,et al.  Time Interference Alignment via Delay Offset for Long Delay Networks , 2011, 2011 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference - GLOBECOM 2011.

[16]  Soo Pieng Tan,et al.  Advanced PANDA for high speed autonomous ambient noise data collection and boat tracking - system and results , 2006, OCEANS 2006 - Asia Pacific.

[17]  M.J. Ryan,et al.  Design of a Propagation-Delay-Tolerant MAC Protocol for Underwater Acoustic Sensor Networks , 2009, IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering.

[18]  James Preisig,et al.  Acoustic propagation considerations for underwater acoustic communications network development , 2006, Underwater Networks.

[19]  Bayan S. Sharif,et al.  An time-domain-oriented multiple access protocol for underwater acoustic network communications , 1999, Oceans '99. MTS/IEEE. Riding the Crest into the 21st Century. Conference and Exhibition. Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No.99CH37008).

[20]  John S. Heidemann,et al.  Comparison and Evaluation of the T-Lohi MAC for Underwater Acoustic Sensor Networks , 2008, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[21]  Wee-Seng Soh,et al.  BiC-MAC: Bidirectional-Concurrent MAC protocol with packet bursting for underwater acoustic networks , 2010, OCEANS 2010 MTS/IEEE SEATTLE.

[22]  Theodore S. Rappaport,et al.  Wireless communications - principles and practice , 1996 .

[23]  Panos M. Pardalos,et al.  Approximate dynamic programming: solving the curses of dimensionality , 2009, Optim. Methods Softw..

[24]  J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves,et al.  Floor acquisition multiple access (FAMA) for packet-radio networks , 1995, SIGCOMM '95.

[25]  Warren B. Powell,et al.  Approximate Dynamic Programming - Solving the Curses of Dimensionality , 2007 .

[26]  Rudolf Mathar,et al.  How to Position n Transmitter-Receiver Pairs in n-1 Dimensions Such That Each Can Use Half of the Channel with Zero Interference from the Others , 2009, GLOBECOM 2009 - 2009 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference.