cooperation in dtn-based network architectures

Cooperation in DTN-Based Network Architectures

Authors:Vasco N. G. J. Soares1,2, Joel J. P. C. Rodrigues1

1 Instituto de Telecomunicações, University of Beira Interior, Covilhã, Portugal 2 Superior School of Technology, Polytechnic Institute of Castelo Branco, Portugal

[email protected], [email protected]:

Mohammad S. Obaidat1, Sudip Misra2

1 Monmouth University, USA2 Ryerson University, Toronto, Canada

[email protected], [email protected]

Outline

• Delay-Tolerant Network

• Vehicular Delay-Tolerant Network

• Cooperation in DTN-Based Networks

• Study of the Impact of Cooperation in a VDTN

04/21/23 2

Delay-Tolerant Network (DTN)

• Overlays a protocol layer, called bundle layer, that it is meant to provide internetworking on heterogeneous networks operating on different transmission media

• Store-carry-and-forward paradigm

• These networks experience any combination of the following:• Sparse connectivity • Long or variable delay• Intermittent connectivity• Asymmetric data rate• High latency• High error rates• No end-to-end connectivity

04/21/23 3

Delay-Tolerant Network (DTN)

• Application Domains• Interplanetary networks • Underwater networks • Wildlife tracking networks • Data MULEs • Transient networks • Disaster recovery networks • People networks • Military tactical networks • Vehicular networks

04/21/23 4

Vehicular Delay-Tolerant Network (VDTN)

• VDTN architecture appears as a network architecture proposal based on the DTN architecture, that aims to provide innovative solutions for challenged vehicular communications

• VDTN applications• Urban Scenario• Disseminate information advertisements • Disseminate safety related information • Distribute multimedia content • Monitoring networks to collect data• …

• Rural Connectivity• Provide data communications

to undeveloped remote areas• Disaster recovery networks

04/21/23 5

VDTN Layered Architecture

• Based on the principle of asynchronous, bundle-oriented communication from the DTN architecture• Store-carry-and-forward paradigm

04/21/23 6


• However, the design of the VDTN network architecture, and its protocol layering, presents unique characteristics: • IP over VDTN approach• Control plane and data plane decoupling• Out-of-band signaling

04/21/23 7


• Control plane and data plane separation• Control plane functions • Signaling messages exchange, node localization, resources reservation (at the

data plane) and routing, among others

• Data plane functions• Buffer management and scheduling, traffic classification, data

aggregation/de-aggregation, and forwarding, among others

• Distinct planes suggests that they can operate independently using their own layers and protocols

04/21/23 8


• Out-of-band signaling• Control plane • Uses a separate,

dedicated, low-power, low bandwidth, and long-range link to exchange signaling information

• Data plane • Uses a high-power, high

bandwidth, and short-range link to exchange data bundles

04/21/23 9

Cooperation in DTN-Based Networks

• Cooperation is a key issue to the success of data communication in DTNs

• In a cooperative environment, network nodes collaborate with each other, storing and distributing bundles not only in their own interest, but also in the interest of other nodes• This increases the number of possible transmission paths, improving the

robustness to failure of individual nodes

04/21/23 10


• In a non-cooperative environment, network nodes exhibit a selfish behavior• This behavior can be caused by several reasons, such as, resource

limitations (e.g. storage, energy) or rogue operation (malicious behavior)

• This leads to degradation of the network performance

04/21/23 11


• Although cooperation is highly important to improve the limited capability of network nodes and, consequently, in increasing the overall network performance, to the best our knowledge, little research has been done in this field

• This chapter surveys recent advances related with the field of cooperation on delay tolerant networks

• Furthermore, it presents a study that evaluates the impact of cooperative behavior on the performance of a VDTN

12


• Previous works (1)• Panagakis et al., “On the Effects of Cooperation in DTNs”, COMSWARE 2007 • State that the literature related to the performance of DTN routing protocols usually

assumes fully cooperative environments, which can be an unrealistic assumption • Define cooperation as the probability of a node to forward message copies or dropped

them on their arrival, and evaluate its effect in terms of delivery delay and transmission overhead on Epidemic, Two-Hop and Binary Spray and Wait routing

• Buttyán et al., “Barter-Based Cooperation in Delay-Tolerant Personal Wireless Networks”, WOWMOM 2007 • Study the problem of selfish node behavior in DTNs used for personal wireless

communications• Propose a mechanism to discourage selfish node behavior during message exchange

based on the principles of barter. This barter-based approach is analyzed with a game-theoretic model

13


• Previous works (2)• Shevade et al., “Incentive-Aware Routing in DTNs”, ICNP 2008 • Also demonstrate the degradation of a DTN network performance due to selfish node

behavior• Propose an incentive-aware DTN routing scheme to stimulate cooperation, which is

based on the use of pair-wise tit-for-tat (TFT) incentive mechanism

• Resta et al., “The Effects of Node Cooperation Level on Routing Performance in Delay Tolerant Networks”, SECON 2009 • Present a theoretical framework for evaluating the effects of different degrees of node

cooperation on the performance of DTN routing protocols (Epidemic, Two-Hop, and Binary Spray and Wait)

• The observed results show that Binary Spray and Wait has the better resilience to lower node cooperation, while presenting the best compromise between packet delivery ratio and message overhead

14


• Previous works (3)• Altman, “Competition and Cooperation Between Nodes in Delay Tolerant

Networks with Two Hop Routing”, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Network Control and Optimization • Analyzes competitive and cooperative operation in DTNs considering a Two-Hop routing

strategy• The effect of competition between network nodes is studied in a game theoretical

setting

• Solis et al., “Controlling Resource Hogs in Mobile Delay-Tolerant Networks”, Computer Communications, Elsevier • Introduce the concept of “resource hog” as a network node that attempts to send more

of its own data and possibly forward less peer data than a typical well-behaved node • A performance evaluation through simulation reveals that the delivery ratio of “well-

behaved” nodes decreases significantly in the presence of a reduced number of nodes acting as “resource hogs”

• The work also proposes and evaluates resource management solutions to deal with the “resource hogs” problem

15

Study of the Impact of Cooperation in a VDTN

• Simulation Settings (network setup)• Modified version of the Opportunistic Network Environment (ONE) Simulator• New modules added (VDTN architecture model, buffer management scheme,

scheduling and drop policies for evaluating the impact of node cooperation)

• Simulation time of a 12-hour period (e.g., from 8:00 to 20:00)• 100 Mobile Nodes (e.g. vehicles)• Random pause times between 5 and 15 m• Speed of 30 km/h• Buffer size varies between 25, 50, 75

and 100 Megabytes across the simulations

• 5 Stationary Relay Nodes• 500 Mbytes message buffer size• Placed at selected crossroads

16

Helsinki simulation scenario


• Simulation Settings (network setup)• Data Bundles• Size is uniformly distributed in the range of [250 K, 2 M] Bytes• Inter-bundle creation interval in the range [15, 30] seconds• Random source and destination vehicles• Time-to-live (TTL) of 180 minutes

• Data bundles transmitted through a link with a data rate of 6 Mbps and an omni-directional transmission range of 30 meters

• Epidemic and Binary Spray and Wait are used as the underlying routing schemes• Performance metrics: bundle delivery probability; bundle delivery delay

• We analyze different performance results when mobile nodes employ 10, 20, 30, 40, or 50 percent of their buffer capacity and bandwidth resources to cooperate in bundle relay

17


• Epidemic routing (1)• Delivery Probability• 20 % of cooperation percentage means that:• 20% of a node’s buffer capacity is used to store

bundles relayed by other nodes, while the remaining 80% are available to store its bundles

• In addition, at a contact opportunity, only 20% of the transmission link bandwidth will be used to relay the other nodes bundles

• When network nodes use a 25 MB buffer, increasing the cooperation percentage from 10% to 20%, results in improving the overall delivery ratio in 13%

• A better delivery ratio can be obtained using a 25 MB buffer size and a 30% cooperation percentage, instead of a 100 MB buffer with a 10% cooperation percentage

18

Effect of node cooperation percentage

on the delivery probability


• Epidemic routing (2)• Delivery Delay• Increasing the mobile nodes buffer size,

contributes to increase the delivery ratio, but also increases the average delivery delay

• This effect is reinforced by the increase of the nodes’ cooperation percentage that also contributes to increase the average time that bundles spend in buffers before being delivered

• Using a 25 MB buffer, when cooperation percentage is lower than 20%, the storage space available for cooperating in the bundle relay process is very close to the average bundle size, which results in a very low number of cooperative bundles stored, and leads to frequent drops of such bundles

19

Effect of node cooperation percentage on the delivery delay


• Binary spray and wait routing (1)• Delivery Probability• The effect of cooperation, as an effective

strategy to increase the overall network bundle delivery, is even more pronounced in this routing protocol

• When mobile nodes have a 25 MB buffer size, changing the cooperation percentage from 10% to 50%, increases the bundles delivery ratio in approximately 19%, 12%, 8%, and 7%, respectively

• Employing a 100 MB buffer with a 10% cooperation percentage results in a similar delivery probability to a 25 MB buffer with a 40% cooperation percentage

20

Effect of node cooperation percentage

on the delivery probability


• Binary spray and wait routing (2)• Delivery Delay• Spray and Wait routing not only registers

better delivery ratios, but also achieves better delivery delays than Epidemic flooding-based routing

• However, cooperation does not have a significant effect on the average delay registered in this routing protocol

• Furthermore, similar average delays are registered for buffer sizes greater than 25 MB, and cooperation percentages greater than 20% • This behavior was expected since similar

delivery probabilities are observed in these cases

21

Effect of node cooperation percentage on the delivery delay

Conclusions• Delay tolerant networking (DTN) is a timely topic that addresses communication in

challenged network environments

• DTN-based networks like vehicular delay-tolerant networks (VDTNs) rely on cooperation behavior to help deliver bundles across sporadically connected nodes

• Non-cooperative behaviors adversely affect the network operation and performance

• This study addressed the research problem of node cooperation in DTN-based network architectures• The related literature about this topic was surveyed

• A study to evaluate the impact of cooperation on the performance of VDTNs using two routing protocols was driven• Results demonstrate the importance of cooperation to improve the bundle

delivery ratio

22

cooperation in dtn-based network architectures

Documents

information data plane

data plane decouplingout

heterogeneous networks

vdtn network architecture

vdtn approachcontrol

forward paradigmthese

exchange data bundles

success of data communication