Choosing the packet size in multi-hop underwater networks

Two MAC layer protocols are considered for multi-hop underwater acoustic networks: Pure CSMA, suitably configured to perform over a long-delay channel, and the Distance-Aware Collision Avoidance Protocol (DACAP), a protocol specifically designed for collision avoidance via a distributed coordination function à la IEEE 802.11. We investigate the impact of packet size on the performance of these two protocols. A comparative analysis, conducted via ns-2 simulations, quantifies throughput efficiency, end-to-end delay and energy-per-bit consumption as functions of the packet size. The results clearly indicate the existence of an optimal packet size for each scenario. The optimal packet size depends on the protocol characteristics, on the offered load, and is heavily influenced by the bit error rate. The results also reveal performance sensitivity to the choice of the packet size for the different protocols (CSMA and DACAP), emphasizing how a wrong selection of the packet size can result in a higher cost to performance.

[1]  Kee Chaing Chua,et al.  Aloha-Based MAC Protocols with Collision Avoidance for Underwater Acoustic Networks , 2007, IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.

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

[3]  M. Stojanovic,et al.  Optimization of a data link protocol for an underwater acoustic channel , 2005, Europe Oceans 2005.

[4]  Milica Stojanovic,et al.  On the relationship between capacity and distance in an underwater acoustic communication channel , 2006, Underwater Networks.

[5]  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.

[6]  J.W. Ng,et al.  End User Controlled Web Interaction Flow Using Service Oriented Architecture Model , 2008, 2008 IEEE Globecom Workshops.

[7]  R. Petroccia,et al.  A comparative performance evaluation of MAC protocols for underwater sensor networks , 2008, OCEANS 2008.

[8]  Ian F. Akyildiz,et al.  State of the art in protocol research for underwater acoustic sensor networks , 2006, MOCO.

[9]  I. Akyildiz,et al.  A Resilient Routing Algorithm for Long-term Applications in Underwater Sensor Networks , 2006 .

[10]  Sumit Roy,et al.  A reservation mac protocol for ad-hoc underwater acoustic sensor networks , 2008, WuWNeT '08.

[11]  M.J. Ryan,et al.  An Adaptive Propagation-delay-tolerant MAC Protocol for Underwater Acoustic Sensor Networks , 2007, OCEANS 2007 - Europe.

[12]  Mehul Motani,et al.  MACA-U: A Media Access Protocol for Underwater Acoustic Networks , 2008, IEEE GLOBECOM 2008 - 2008 IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference.

[13]  Milica Stojanovic,et al.  Underwater Acoustic Communications and Networking: Recent Advances and Future Challenges , 2008 .

[14]  Michele Zorzi,et al.  Energy-Efficient Routing Schemes for Underwater Acoustic Networks , 2008, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

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

[16]  Yuan Li,et al.  Research challenges and applications for underwater sensor networking , 2006, IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, 2006. WCNC 2006..

[17]  Milica Stojanovic,et al.  Focused beam routing protocol for underwater acoustic networks , 2008, Underwater Networks.

[18]  S. G. Chappell,et al.  Exploiting dynamic source routing to enable undersea networking over an ad-hoc topology , 2002, Proceedings of the 2002 Interntional Symposium on Underwater Technology (Cat. No.02EX556).