Quantifying Factors Affecting Quality of Service in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks

Support for quality of service (QoS) is increasingly important in mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs) with the emergence of delay-sensitive applications. This article quantifies the impact of factors and their interactions on the performance of real-time flows through statistical analysis of data gathered in simulation. The factors considered include QoS architecture, routing protocol, medium access control (MAC) protocol, mobility model, and offered load. The QoS architectures considered include stateless (Swan), stateful (Insignia), and no support for QoS. For routing, proactive (OLSR) and reactive (DSR, AODV) protocols are considered. The IEEE 802.11 distributed coordination function (DCF) and its QoS-aware extension enhanced DCF (EDCF) are the MAC protocols considered. The authors find that the stateless architecture of Swan better supports QoS than the stateful approach of Insignia or the classic architecture in the two mobility models considered.

[1]  Charles E. Perkins,et al.  Performance comparison of two on-demand routing protocols for ad hoc networks , 2001, IEEE Wirel. Commun..

[2]  M. Satyanarayanan,et al.  Mobile computing , 1993, Computer.

[3]  CampTracy,et al.  Stationary Distributions for the Random Waypoint Mobility Model , 2004 .

[4]  Andrew T. Campbell,et al.  INSIGNIA: An IP-Based Quality of Service Framework for Mobile ad Hoc Networks , 2000, J. Parallel Distributed Comput..

[5]  Charles E. Perkins,et al.  The effects of MAC protocols on ad hoc network communication , 2000, 2000 IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference. Conference Record (Cat. No.00TH8540).

[6]  Chenxi Zhu,et al.  QoS routing for mobile ad hoc networks , 2002, Proceedings.Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies.

[7]  Tomasz Imielinski,et al.  Mobile Computing , 1996 .

[8]  Ahmed Helmy,et al.  IMPORTANT: a framework to systematically analyze the Impact of Mobility on Performance of Routing Protocols for Adhoc Networks , 2003, IEEE INFOCOM 2003. Twenty-second Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37428).

[9]  Tracy Camp,et al.  Stationary distributions for the random waypoint mobility model , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[10]  Violet R. Syrotiuk,et al.  Factor interaction on service delivery in mobile ad hoc networks , 2004, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[11]  Madhav V. Marathe,et al.  Characterizing the interaction between routing and MAC protocols in ad-hoc networks , 2002, MobiHoc '02.

[12]  Charles E. Perkins,et al.  Ad-hoc on-demand distance vector routing , 1999, Proceedings WMCSA'99. Second IEEE Workshop on Mobile Computing Systems and Applications.

[13]  Andrea J. Goldsmith,et al.  Joint modulation and multiple access optimization under energy constraints , 2004, IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, 2004. GLOBECOM '04..

[14]  Andrea J. Goldsmith,et al.  Joint routing, MAC, and link layer optimization in sensor networks with energy constraints , 2005, IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2005. ICC 2005. 2005.

[15]  Margaret J. Robertson,et al.  Design and Analysis of Experiments , 2006, Handbook of statistics.

[16]  Sunghyun Choi,et al.  IEEE 802.11 e contention-based channel access (EDCF) performance evaluation , 2003, IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2003. ICC '03..

[17]  Klara Nahrstedt,et al.  Distributed quality-of-service routing in ad hoc networks , 1999, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[18]  JONG-MU CHOI,et al.  A PERFORMANCE EVALUATION FOR AD HOC ROUTING PROTOCOLS IN REALISTIC MILITARY SCENARIOS , .

[19]  Gregory A. Hansen,et al.  The Optimized Link State Routing Protocol , 2003 .

[20]  Andrew T. Campbell,et al.  SWAN: service differentiation in stateless wireless ad hoc networks , 2002, Proceedings.Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies.