1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to an improved system and method for locating optimal routes between source and destination nodes in a communications network, in particular, a wireless ad-hoc communications network. More particularly, the present invention relates to a system and method for identifying optimal routes between source and destination nodes in a communications network by estimating the a posteriori packet completion rate.
2. Description of the Related Art
Wireless communication networks, such as mobile wireless telephone networks, have become increasingly prevalent over the past decade. These wireless communications networks are commonly referred to as “cellular networks”, because the network infrastructure is arranged to divide the service area into a plurality of regions called “cells”. A terrestrial cellular network includes a plurality of interconnected base stations, or base nodes, that are distributed geographically at designated locations throughout the service area. Each base node includes one or more transceivers that are capable of transmitting and receiving electromagnetic signals, such as radio frequency (RF) communications signals, to and from mobile user nodes, such as wireless telephones, located within the coverage area. The communications signals include, for example, voice data that has been modulated according to a desired modulation technique and transmitted as data packets. As can be appreciated by one skilled in the art, network nodes transmit and receive data packet communications in a multiplexed format, such as time-division multiple access (TDMA) format, code-division multiple access (CDMA) format, or frequency-division multiple access (FDMA) format, which enables a single transceiver at a first node to communicate simultaneously with several other nodes in its coverage area.
In recent years, a type of mobile communications network known as an “ad-hoc” network has been developed. In this type of network, each mobile node is capable of operating as a base station or router for the other mobile nodes, thus eliminating the need for a fixed infrastructure of base stations. Details of an ad-hoc network are set forth in U.S. Pat. No. 5,943,322 to Mayor, the entire content of which is incorporated herein by reference.
More sophisticated ad-hoc networks are also being developed which, in addition to enabling mobile nodes to communicate with each other as in a conventional ad-hoc network, further enable the mobile nodes to access a fixed network and thus communicate with other mobile nodes, such as those on the public switched telephone network (PSTN), and on other networks such as the Internet. Details of these advanced types of ad-hoc networks are described in U.S. Pat. No. 7,072,650 entitled “Ad Hoc Peer-to-Peer Mobile Radio Access System Interfaced to the PSTN and Cellular Networks”, granted on Jul. 4, 2006, in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/815,157 entitled “Time Division Protocol for an Ad-Hoc, Peer-to-Peer Radio Network Having Coordinating Channel Access to Shared Parallel Data Channels with Separate Reservation Channel”, filed on Mar. 22, 2001, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,807,165, and in U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/815,164 entitled “Prioritized-Routing for an Ad-Hoc, Peer-to-Peer, Mobile Radio Access System”, filed on Mar. 22, 2001, now U.S. Pat. No. 6,873,839, the entire content of each being incorporated herein by reference.
As can be appreciated by one skilled in the art, since certain nodes of the ad-hoc network are mobile, it is necessary for the network to maintain connectivity with those nodes. Transmitted data packets typically “hop” from mobile device to mobile device, creating a transmission path, or route, until reaching a final destination. However, transmission paths between mobile devices are often subject to change as devices move, therefore ad-hoc network communication must be able to adapt to achieve optimum performance while addressing the limited capabilities and capacities of mobile individual devices.
In a typical wireless communication network, the number of hops between the source and the destination is used as the routing metric, with the route having a lesser number of hops typically being a more preferred route. However, this can lead to selection of un-optimal routes, as there can be a better route with a greater number of hops but better link quality or data rate.
Examples of types of routing protocols are described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,412,654, and in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/476,237 referenced above, the entire contents of both documents being incorporated herein by reference. In these techniques, each node calculates a route metric to its destination, possibly using alternate routes. The aim is to select the best route by selecting the route with the lowest metric.
As described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,412,654, the metric is simply the number of hops. However, as described in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/476,237, the metric is a more elaborate value and relies on a “link reliability” calculation that is based on signal strength. The “link reliability” is a more refined component of a routing metric because, instead of adding “1” for each hop, the algorithm adds an integer value which is larger (e.g., 20) if the link cannot be used to its fullest potential. Thus, each node assigns an integer value which is minimal (e.g., 1) for the best radio links and larger (e.g., 20) if the radio link is degraded due to, for example, multipath, fading, congestion, distance, shadowing, interference, and so on. Other examples of techniques for determining link quality are set forth in published U.S. Patent Application No. 2004/0022223 and in U.S. Pat. No. 6,522,881, the entire contents of both being incorporated herein by reference.
Although the technique described in the provisional patent application referenced above is suitable for many radio networks, including wireless ad-hoc peer-to-peer networks, certain drawbacks of the technique may become apparent when used in a network comprising mainly low-cost wideband radios. For example, sporadic traffic errors such as those encountered in a normal radio channel (such as static multipath) do not usually cause the link reliability to be adjusted, since signal strength and signal-to-noise ratio are unaffected. Also, in the particular case of a fading channel, the low-cost wideband radio is not able to properly track the variations in signal strength that are encountered at the receiver's end. This is partly due to the fact that the measurement depends on the sensitivity of the radio, and partly due to the fact that the receiver can only make sporadic measurements (such as one particular point in time when the packet is received), which provides partial information about actual signal strength variations.
Accordingly, a need exists for an improved system and method for discovering optimal routes between source and destination nodes in a communications network in an efficient way using factors other than the number of hops or received signal strength as the sole metrics.
An object of the present invention is to provide an improved system and method for locating optimal routes between source and destination nodes in a communications network, in particular, a wireless ad-hoc communications network.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an improved system and method for identifying optimal routes between source and destination nodes in a communications network using factors other than the number of hops between the nodes or power control as the only metrics on which the optimal route selection is based.
These and other objects are substantially achieved by a system and method for locating optimal routes between source and destination nodes in a communications network, in particular, a wireless ad-hoc communications network by employing a link reliability algorithm that estimates the reliability of links between nodes using a prediction mechanism and a variable-weight filter. The prediction can be based on signal strength, signal-to-noise ratio or any statistic collected at the physical layer that is deemed representative of the quality of a link, and the weighting filter adjusts the predicted value based on the traffic conditions (e.g., idle, light traffic, moderate or heavy traffic) being experienced by the nodes whose link qualities are being estimated.
These and other objects, advantages and novel features of the invention will be more readily appreciated from the following detailed description when read in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which:
a) is a graph illustrating a set of quantized Λ for various inter-arrival times Δt; and
b) is a graph illustrating the response of the variable weight filter to control channel (idle), light traffic, moderate traffic and heavy traffic operating conditions of a node in the system shown in
As can be appreciated by one skilled in the art, the nodes 102, 106 and 107 are capable of communicating with each other directly, or via one or more other nodes 102, 106 or 107 operating as a router or routers for packets being sent between nodes, as described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,943,322 to Mayor, and in U.S. Pat. No. 7,072,650, Ser. No. 09/815,157 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,873,839, referenced above.
As shown in
Each node 102, 106 and 107 further includes a memory 114, such as a random access memory (RAM) that is capable of storing, among other things, routing information pertaining to itself and other nodes in the network 100. As further shown in
As discussed in the Background section above, in order to optimize network performance, techniques have been developed which enable nodes to select optimum links via which to send data packets between each other. Such techniques may estimate link reliability based on signal strength. Unfortunately, as discussed above, signal strength does not necessarily provide an accurate measure of link reliability. The technique according to an embodiment of the present invention as described below is more universal than previous techniques, and can be applied to virtually any radio technology (i.e., it is “radio agnostic”). This ability is advantageous and important because link reliability determines the best metric used for the routing protocol, which may be required to operate on multiple radio technologies, possibly at the same time.
As can be appreciated by one skilled in the art, the link reliability to a neighboring node is a measure of the probability of a packet being successfully received by the neighboring node. The link reliability can be predicted by using, for example, the received signal strength or the signal-to-noise ratio of received data packets. This is especially useful if there is no active communication to the neighbor. The link reliability can also be measured by using MAC information. However, typically this can be accomplished with a reasonable degree of accuracy only if there is an active communication link to the neighbor.
The components of the link reliability estimation algorithm according to an embodiment of the present invention include a prediction mechanism and a variable-weight filter. The prediction can be based on signal strength, signal-to-noise ratio or any statistic collected at the physical layer that is deemed representative of the quality of a link. The prediction needs to be performed when there is no established link to a particular node and when it is possible to receive information about that node. This can be accomplished either through passive listening of packets directed to other nodes, or active reception of special advertisement/awareness packets, such as the “hello” messages that are sent on the reservation channel as described in U.S. Provisional Patent Application Ser. No. 60/476,237 referenced above.
The object of the current invention is to measure the a posteriori packet completion rate by using a variable weight filter. Since packets are received and transmitted at non-regular intervals, in order to perform proper filtering, it is necessary to adjust the forgetting factor to the actual time-step (fixed-weight filter implementations assume a constant time-step). Otherwise, the system would converge too fast in high traffic conditions and too slow in moderate traffic conditions. This novel approach normalizes the convergence rate of the link reliability calculation mechanism vis-à-vis time, i.e., it is independent of the type and amount of traffic the transceiver is sending, which is unpredictable and chaotic by nature (the transceiver has no knowledge of the application that it is used for). Specifically, the determination of the packet completion rate is to some extent independent of the time interval. Although it may be easier to look at the past “x” amount of packets and count the number that were successful and the number that failed and derive the completion rate from those numbers, this method is inefficient because it requires a memory of all of the past “x” number of transactions. The method is also inaccurate from a time standpoint because it would not be aware of whether the last “x” transactions occurred within the last hour or last millisecond. The present invention therefore addresses these two issues: computational efficiency and quasi independence vis-à-vis time.
The link reliability computation is performed according to Equation 1 as follows:
LR(t0)=(1−λΔt/ΔT)·X(t0)+λΔt/ΔT·LR(t−1) Equation 1—Link Reliability estimation
LR(t0) is the current link reliability
LR(L−1) is the previous link reliability
λΔt/ΔT is the current forgetting factor
Δt=t0−t−1 is the current inter-arrival time
ΔT is the reference time unit
X(t0) is the current filter input (based on prediction).
The output of the filter that is described in Equation 1 will converge towards the average of the inputs (X(t0)). Therefore, if the input of the filter is the value 0 for each failed transmission and 1 for each successful transmission, the output of the filter, after a certain number of iterations, will converge towards the ratio of the number of successfully transmitted packets and the number of transmitted packets. This ratio is by definition the packet completion rate
For programming convenience, the forgetting factor can be quantized into a finite number of values such as those presented in
It is further noted that the network architect should determine the equation for “predicted value” based on certain radio characteristics such as sensitivity for various data rates, mobility performance, and so on. The equation used for the prediction in MeshNetworks' Mea™ system is twofold: there is a conservative prediction for idle operation and a proactive prediction for active communication links. Assuming that the links are symmetrical from a transmit power point of view, both predictions are based on the received signal strengths of packets. If the links are asymmetrical from a transmit power point of view, it is important to ensure that the “received signal strength” that is used is the one that is measured by the receiver.
The following equations represent examples of those for prediction values:
The variable forgetting factor is selected to accommodate various operating conditions such as the following three:
By calculating the time between each transmission, the transceiver 108 of a node 102, 106 or 107 is able to select the forgetting factor accordingly and compute the new link reliability in accordance with Equation 1, which is represented as a block diagram in
a) shows a set of quantized Λ(Δt/ΔT) (where λ=(26−1)/26 and Δt is equal to 85 ms), and
Values for λ(Δt/ΔT) have been quantized for programming convenience. Once the inter-arrival time has been determined, a value gets added or subtracted to the previous link reliability value LR(t−1): that value is λ(Δt/ΔT)·X(t0). As can be appreciated by one experienced in the art, such multiplication in a fixed-point processor can be difficult to accomplish, especially since λ(Δt/ΔT) is a real number greater than 0 and smaller than 1. If λ(Δt/ΔT) can be expressed as the inverse of a power of 2, the multiplication become as simple right-bit-shift operation. If the power of two that corresponds to a specific λ(Δt/ΔT) is N, then
Using this example, the quantized λ(Δt/ΔT) values are given in the following table:
The link reliability calculation is therefore performed using N=3 in idle operation (which corresponds to a Δt greater than 500 ms), N=4 in light traffic (which corresponds to a Δt between 200 ms and 500 ms), N=5 in moderate traffic (which corresponds to a Δt between 100 ms and 200 ms) and N=6 is heavy traffic (which corresponds to a Δt smaller than 100 ms).
The following section is an explanation of how the predictive model combined with a variable-weight filter enables a mobile node (e.g., node 102) to establish optimal routes in a wireless ad hoc network 100.
Link reliability estimation is critical in the following scenarios: first, when a link is established, and second, when a link is broken. These events may occur in the following conditions: first, while remaining within a particular neighborhood and secondly, while leaving a neighborhood. The possible cases are summarized in Table 1 below:
Each case scenario is described in more detail in the following sections.
Neighborhood entry:
Neighborhood exit:
Link adjustment:
Link failure memory:
As can be appreciated from the above, the system and method presented herein calculates an integer value (the “link reliability”) in order for the routing protocol to select the best route to its destination. This technique can also be used for more advanced features such as data rate selection, channel selection or even packet fragmentation/concatenation. Furthermore, link reliability can be determined using the aforementioned system and method independently for each carrier frequency, for each packet size interval, for each data rate or for each modulation type the system operates with, or for any combination of those. Thus, the system and method can determine which optimal channel, fragmentation/concatenation method, data rate or modulation type it must use at any given time by selecting the one which provides the best link reliability.
As can further be appreciated from the above, the technique according to the embodiment of the present invention is advantageous over the techniques described in the Background section for several reasons. First, the technique is unit-testable, meaning that it is easy to verify that the algorithm has been properly implemented. SNR and signal-strength-based methods cannot be expected to tell exactly how reliable links are, but rather, they can only estimate the reliability. The technique is also programmable and can be implemented in a microprocessor, and it is synthesizable and thus can be implemented in an ASIC or FPGA. The technique is also portable in that it can be used for any type of packet radio, regardless of the bandwidth or the fading characteristics of the band in which the radio operates. One of the features of the algorithm is that the traffic need not be constant or regulated. Furthermore, the technique is adaptive and thus can be adjusted for any degree of traffic load or convergence times, and filter parameters and inter-arrival time boundaries can be adjusted externally. In addition, the technique is simple to implement and development costs are minimal.
Although only a few exemplary embodiments of the present invention have been described in detail above, those skilled in the art will readily appreciate that many modifications are possible in the exemplary embodiments without materially departing from the novel teachings and advantages of this invention. Accordingly, all such modifications are intended to be included within the scope of this invention as defined in the following claims.
This application claims benefit under 35 U.S.C. § 119(e) from U.S. Provisional Patent Application of Avinash Joshi entitled “System and Method to Improve the Network Performance of a Wireless Communication Network by Finding an Optimal Route Between a Source and a Destination”, Ser. No. 60/476,237, filed on Jun. 6, 2003, in a U.S. Provisional Patent Application of Guenael T. Strutt entitled “A System and Method for Providing a Measure of Link Reliability to a Routing Protocol in an Ad Hoc Wireless Network, Ser. No. 60/546,940, filed on Feb. 24, 2004, and from U.S. Provisional Patent Application of Avinash Joshi and Guenael T. Strutt entitled “System and Method for Characterizing the Quality of a Link in a Wireless Network”, Ser. No. 60/546,941, filed on Feb. 24, 2004, the entire contents of both documents being incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4494192 | Lew et al. | Jan 1985 | A |
4617656 | Kobayashi et al. | Oct 1986 | A |
4736371 | Tejima et al. | Apr 1988 | A |
4742357 | Rackley | May 1988 | A |
4747130 | Ho | May 1988 | A |
4910521 | Mellon | Mar 1990 | A |
5034961 | Adams | Jul 1991 | A |
5068916 | Harrison et al. | Nov 1991 | A |
5231634 | Giles et al. | Jul 1993 | A |
5233604 | Ahmadi et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5241542 | Natarajan et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5317566 | Joshi | May 1994 | A |
5392450 | Nossen | Feb 1995 | A |
5412654 | Perkins | May 1995 | A |
5424747 | Chazelas | Jun 1995 | A |
5502722 | Fulghum | Mar 1996 | A |
5517491 | Nanni et al. | May 1996 | A |
5555425 | Zeller et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5555540 | Radke | Sep 1996 | A |
5572528 | Shuen | Nov 1996 | A |
5615212 | Ruszczyk et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5618045 | Kagan et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5621732 | Osawa | Apr 1997 | A |
5623495 | Eng et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5627976 | McFarland et al. | May 1997 | A |
5631897 | Pacheco et al. | May 1997 | A |
5644576 | Bauchot et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5652751 | Sharony | Jul 1997 | A |
5680392 | Semaan | Oct 1997 | A |
5684794 | Lopez et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5687194 | Paneth et al. | Nov 1997 | A |
5696903 | Mahany | Dec 1997 | A |
5701294 | Ward et al. | Dec 1997 | A |
5706428 | Boer et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5717689 | Ayanoglu | Feb 1998 | A |
5745483 | Nakagawa et al. | Apr 1998 | A |
5774876 | Wooley et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5781540 | Malcolm et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787080 | Hulyalkar et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5794154 | Bar-On et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796732 | Mazzola et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5796741 | Saito et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5805593 | Busche | Sep 1998 | A |
5805842 | Nagaraj et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5805977 | Hill et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5809518 | Lee | Sep 1998 | A |
5822309 | Ayanoglu et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5844905 | McKay et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5845097 | Kang et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5857084 | Klein | Jan 1999 | A |
5870350 | Bertin et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5877724 | Davis | Mar 1999 | A |
5881095 | Cadd | Mar 1999 | A |
5881372 | Kruys | Mar 1999 | A |
5886992 | Raatikainen et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5896561 | Schrader et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5903559 | Acharya et al. | May 1999 | A |
5909651 | Chander et al. | Jun 1999 | A |
5936953 | Simmons | Aug 1999 | A |
5943322 | Mayor et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5987011 | Toh | Nov 1999 | A |
5987033 | Boer et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5991279 | Haugli et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6028853 | Haartsen | Feb 2000 | A |
6029217 | Arimilli et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6034542 | Ridgeway | Mar 2000 | A |
6044062 | Brownrigg et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6047330 | Stracke, Jr. | Apr 2000 | A |
6052594 | Chuang et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6052752 | Kwon | Apr 2000 | A |
6064626 | Stevens | May 2000 | A |
6067291 | Kamerman et al. | May 2000 | A |
6067297 | Beach | May 2000 | A |
6078566 | Kikinis | Jun 2000 | A |
6104712 | Robert et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6108738 | Chambers et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6115580 | Chuprun et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6122690 | Nannetti et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6130881 | Stiller et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6132306 | Trompower | Oct 2000 | A |
6147975 | Bowman-Amuah | Nov 2000 | A |
6163699 | Naor et al. | Dec 2000 | A |
6178337 | Spartz et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6192053 | Angelico et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6192230 | van Bokhorst et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6208870 | Lorello et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6222463 | Rai | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6222504 | Oby | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6223240 | Odenwald et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6240294 | Hamilton et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6246875 | Seazholtz et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6249516 | Brownrigg et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6275707 | Reed et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6285892 | Hulyalkar | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6304556 | Haas | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6327300 | Souissi et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6349091 | Li | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6349210 | Li | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6359872 | Mahany et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6366568 | Bolgiano et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6405049 | Herrod et al. | Jun 2002 | B2 |
6609002 | Krishnamurthy et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6721290 | Kondylis et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
7002918 | Prieto et al. | Feb 2006 | B1 |
7200149 | Hasty, Jr. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
20010053699 | McCrady et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020013856 | Garcia-Luna-Aceves | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020101822 | Ayyagari et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020191573 | Whitehill et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030142647 | Agrawal et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030161268 | Larsson et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030202469 | Cain | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030212821 | Gillies et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030229613 | Zargham et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040032847 | Cain | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040109428 | Krishnamurthy | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040203820 | Billhartz | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040208127 | Rodriguez et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2132180 | Mar 1996 | CA |
0513841 | Nov 1992 | EP |
0627827 | Dec 1994 | EP |
0924890 | Jun 1999 | EP |
2683326 | Jul 1993 | FR |
WO 9608884 | Mar 1996 | WO |
WO 9724005 | Jul 1997 | WO |
WO 9839936 | Sep 1998 | WO |
WO 9912302 | Mar 1999 | WO |
WO 0034932 | Jun 2000 | WO |
WO 0110154 | Feb 2001 | WO |
WO 0133770 | May 2001 | WO |
WO 0135567 | May 2001 | WO |
WO 0137481 | May 2001 | WO |
WO 0137482 | May 2001 | WO |
WO 0137483 | May 2001 | WO |
WO 0235253 | May 2002 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20040260808 A1 | Dec 2004 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60476237 | Jun 2003 | US | |
60546940 | Feb 2004 | US | |
60546941 | Feb 2004 | US |